🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <fjf.20000127014253@gnu.de>,
  frank@[NOSPAM.REMOVE.THIS]g-n-u.de wrote:
> In <86mdcv$tp9$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Robert AH Prins <prinsra@williscorroon.com> wrote:
>
> > Note to the makers of (non-)commercial Pascal compilers
> > (FreePascal/GNU Pascal & Virtual Pascal/TMT Pascal): Consider doing
> > what IBM has done for years with its MF OSes, add user exits to your
> > RTLs, an indirect far call, (defaulting to a far ret,) would be ever
> > so useful, not only for debugging purposes, but also for profiling!
> > (Consider making it available in a separate debugging/profiling RTL)
>
> I'm not completely sure what you mean here. I can imagine two things
> which GNU Pascal both provides:
>
> - User-defined finalization code (as defined in the standard) which
>   can be used, e.g., to check for memory leaks at the end of the
>   program. In fact, we have a unit which does this (quite primitive
>   now, but can be extended)...

Under a really good OS there should be no need for this. If the program
runs in its own address space and terminates, the OS should clean up
after it if the program doesn't do so itself! (Like MVS does!)

> - Hooks into the heap allocation. There are variables (GetMemPtr
>   etc.) which are pointers to the low-level heap management
>   routines. A program can redirect them to its own routines. E.g.,
>   to do some accounting and checking before/after calling the
>   original routines.

Yes, yes, yes! That is exactly what I mean!

Another example, just springing into mind, are TFDDs in TP/BP, I believe
you've got one that takes over WRITELN to write to strings.

Robert
--
Robert AH Prins
prinsra@willis.com


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.