On Wednesday, March 31, 2021 at 4:38:57 PM UTC-4, nikiti...@gmail.com wrote:
> среда, 31 марта 2021 г. в 20:31:59 UTC+3, Андрей Никитин:
> > среда, 31 марта 2021 г. в 19:30:24 UTC+3, fred_...@hotmail.com:
> > > On Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 6:51:15 PM UTC-4, nikiti...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > Today on github.com I posted the decompiled code
> > > > CPP.COM programs from the Hi-Tech C compiler v3.09 for CP/M and a new preprocessor for this compiler with support for C++ comments and compatible with the former. The code can be downloaded from the following link
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/nikitinprior/dcpp
> > > Very Welcome Change!
> > >
> > > Thanks for your work! Much appreciated. Less changes to C code to bring to Z80. As a PS. The new CPP cannot
> > > be built on a "real box" -- it needs more than 63k CP/M (I guess zxc provides 64k environment, or maybe even
> > > larger). Not a serious issue....
> > >
> > > Thanks Again!
> > > FredW
> > Thank you for your kind wishes.
> >
> > I compiled the new preprocessor using zxc. At first I tried to leave all the functions that were present in the file with the source code of the J.. Schilling program. However, I ran into a lack of memory while optimizing the program. The next step was to remove some additional features that were missing in the Hi-Tech C version. That helped. The programs compiled normally. Perhaps part of the code needs to be moved into a separate function and the remaining little-demanded features should be removed.
> >
> > In addition to handling C++ comments, it is important to be able to compile the program on real hardware. This is one of my tasks.
> >
> > Regards
> > Andrey Nikitin
> I installed a new preprocessor on my computer in the Hi-Tech C environment and in the process I will check the correctness of its work. I would be grateful to everyone who can help with testing and finding bugs. Together w can bring it to a good sta

Andrey

Hope you get this -- I have been using HI-TECH C 3.09 with your new CPP. So far, everything is great!

But note the following:

1 - #pragma, #error, #ident are... useless. just copied through. Can these be discarded? Or, just let them be
bad preproc directives (saves space). HI-TECH z80 implements NO pragmas.

2 - It would be VERY useful to have "#warning message" -- just display file: line: warning: message on the console
and continue. Do NOT copy through to output!

This would allow better compatibility with gcc. Right now, we can get a warning from GCC but NOT hi-tech

#ifdef z80
... something
#else
#pragma GCC warning "gcc not good here"
#endif

does it. But... we cannot warn on z80 compile for anything... #pragma is copied through, and will
cause an error in P1 We cannot use #warning, as that will cause CPP to fail.. And that is why I
would love to have #warning on the HI-TECH CPP. #error COULD be coded to exit(1) the preprocessor.
That would be useful.

FredW

суббота, 26 июня 2021 г. в 01:34:38 UTC+3, fridtjof.ma...@gmail.com:
> On Wednesday, March 31, 2021 at 4:38:57 PM UTC-4, nikiti...@gmail.com wrote:
> > среда, 31 марта 2021 г. в 20:31:59 UTC+3, Андрей Никитин:
> > > среда, 31 марта 2021 г. в 19:30:24 UTC+3, fred_...@hotmail.com:
> > > > On Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 6:51:15 PM UTC-4, nikiti...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > Today on github.com I posted the decompiled code
> > > > > CPP.COM programs from the Hi-Tech C compiler v3.09 for CP/M and a new preprocessor for this compiler with support for C++ comments and compatible with the former. The code can be downloaded from the following link
> > > > >
> > > > > https://github.com/nikitinprior/dcpp
> > > > Very Welcome Change!
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your work! Much appreciated. Less changes to C code to bring to Z80. As a PS. The new CPP cannot
> > > > be built on a "real box" -- it needs more than 63k CP/M (I guess zxc provides 64k environment, or maybe even
> > > > larger). Not a serious issue....
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Again!
> > > > FredW
> > > Thank you for your kind wishes.
> > >
> > > I compiled the new preprocessor using zxc. At first I tried to leave all the functions that were present in the file with the source code of the J. Schilling program. However, I ran into a lack of memory while optimizing the program. The next step was to remove some additional features that were missing in the Hi-Tech C version. That helped. The programs compiled normally. Perhaps part of the code needs to be moved into a separate function and the remaining little-demanded features should be removed.
> > >
> > > In addition to handling C++ comments, it is important to be able to compile the program on real hardware. This is one of my tasks.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Andrey Nikitin
> > I installed a new preprocessor on my computer in the Hi-Tech C environment and in the process I will check the correctness of its work. I would be grateful to everyone who can help with testing and finding bugs. Together w can bring it to a good sta
>
> Andrey
>
> Hope you get this -- I have been using HI-TECH C 3.09 with your new CPP. So far, everything is great!
>
> But note the following:
>
> 1 - #pragma, #error, #ident are... useless. just copied through. Can these be discarded? Or, just let them be
> bad preproc directives (saves space). HI-TECH z80 implements NO pragmas.
>
> 2 - It would be VERY useful to have "#warning message" -- just display file: line: warning: message on the console
> and continue. Do NOT copy through to output!
>
> This would allow better compatibility with gcc. Right now, we can get a warning from GCC but NOT hi-tech
>
> #ifdef z80
> ... something
> #else
> #pragma GCC warning "gcc not good here"
> #endif
>
> does it. But... we cannot warn on z80 compile for anything... #pragma is copied through, and will
> cause an error in P1 We cannot use #warning, as that will cause CPP to fail. And that is why I
> would love to have #warning on the HI-TECH CPP. #error COULD be coded to exit(1) the preprocessor.
> That would be useful.
>
> FredW

First you write:

"#pragma, #error, #ident are... Can these be discarded?",

and at the end you offer:

"#error COULD be coded to exit(1) the preprocessor."

this is not entirely logical.

I am not the author of this program, but only adapted it for compiling HI-TECH C 3.09.

The code for processing the "#error message " directive was already present in the program and it only needs to be activated. I have made the appropriate changes to the program and I express my gratitude for the comment made.

As for other directives, they do not interfere and do not require a lot of memory.

The "#warning message " directive can be added, but in GCC it is implemented via #pragma. Therefore, compatibility with GCC will not be achieved.

Thank you for your comments

Andrey Nikitin

On Saturday, June 26, 2021 at 7:58:13 AM UTC-4, nikiti...@gmail.com wrote:
> суббота, 26 июня 2021 г. в 01:34:38 UTC+3, fridtjof.ma...@gmail.com:
> > On Wednesday, March 31, 2021 at 4:38:57 PM UTC-4, nikiti...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > среда, 31 марта 2021 г. в 20:31:59 UTC+3, Андрей Никитин:
> > > > среда, 31 марта 2021 г. в 19:30:24 UTC+3, fred_...@hotmail.com:
> > > > > On Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 6:51:15 PM UTC-4, nikiti...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > Today on github.com I posted the decompiled code
> > > > > > CPP.COM programs from the Hi-Tech C compiler v3.09 for CP/M and a new preprocessor for this compiler with support for C++ comments and compatible with the former. The code can be downloaded from the following link
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://github.com/nikitinprior/dcpp
> > > > > Very Welcome Change!
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for your work! Much appreciated. Less changes to C code to bring to Z80. As a PS. The new CPP cannot
> > > > > be built on a "real box" -- it needs more than 63k CP/M (I guess zxc provides 64k environment, or maybe even
> > > > > larger). Not a serious issue....
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks Again!
> > > > > FredW
> > > > Thank you for your kind wishes.
> > > >
> > > > I compiled the new preprocessor using zxc. At first I tried to leave all the functions that were present in the file with the source code of the J. Schilling program. However, I ran into a lack of memory while optimizing the program. The next step was to remove some additional features that were missing in the Hi-Tech C version. That helped. The programs compiled normally. Perhaps part of the code needs to be moved into a separate function and the remaining little-demanded features should be removed.
> > > >
> > > > In addition to handling C++ comments, it is important to be able to compile the program on real hardware. This is one of my tasks.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Andrey Nikitin
> > > I installed a new preprocessor on my computer in the Hi-Tech C environment and in the process I will check the correctness of its work. I would be grateful to everyone who can help with testing and finding bugs. Together w can bring it to a good sta
> >
> > Andrey
> >
> > Hope you get this -- I have been using HI-TECH C 3.09 with your new CPP.. So far, everything is great!
> >
> > But note the following:
> >
> > 1 - #pragma, #error, #ident are... useless. just copied through. Can these be discarded? Or, just let them be
> > bad preproc directives (saves space). HI-TECH z80 implements NO pragmas..
> >
> > 2 - It would be VERY useful to have "#warning message" -- just display file: line: warning: message on the console
> > and continue. Do NOT copy through to output!
> >
> > This would allow better compatibility with gcc. Right now, we can get a warning from GCC but NOT hi-tech
> >
> > #ifdef z80
> > ... something
> > #else
> > #pragma GCC warning "gcc not good here"
> > #endif
> >
> > does it. But... we cannot warn on z80 compile for anything... #pragma is copied through, and will
> > cause an error in P1 We cannot use #warning, as that will cause CPP to fail. And that is why I
> > would love to have #warning on the HI-TECH CPP. #error COULD be coded to exit(1) the preprocessor.
> > That would be useful.
> >
> > FredW
> First you write:
>
> "#pragma, #error, #ident are... Can these be discarded?",
>
> and at the end you offer:
> "#error COULD be coded to exit(1) the preprocessor."
> this is not entirely logical.
>
> I am not the author of this program, but only adapted it for compiling HI-TECH C 3.09.
>
> The code for processing the "#error message " directive was already present in the program and it only needs to be activated. I have made the appropriate changes to the program and I express my gratitude for the comment made.
>
> As for other directives, they do not interfere and do not require a lot of memory.
>
> The "#warning message " directive can be added, but in GCC it is implemented via #pragma. Therefore, compatibility with GCC will not be achieved.
>
> Thank you for your comments
>
> Andrey Nikitin

Andrey -- The "#warning message" is actually supported by GCC. GCC produces

tuck:63:2: warning: #warning warning [-Wcpp]

If the "#warning# is inside a "#if 0 ... #endif", gcc ignores it -- BUT -- CPP.COM says:

tuck: 61: undefined control

AND STOPS THE COMPILATION. For a CPP directive inside of a block that is not being passed to P1 even! However, if the
"#warning message" is changed to #pragma GCC warn "message"
-- then GCC takes is as #warning and CPP.COM is ok with it because CPP.COM currently just passes the pragma along to P1.COM
As long as the pragma is inside a #if 0 then CPP.COM DOESN'T pass it on (GCC only code) and the warning is given.

Since GCC *also* implements #warning -- if CPP.COM implemented #warning we could have warnings inside GCC only blocks
and z80 only blocks.

Yes, I know you are not the orginal author -- I can make these changes on a fork. But I am hot and heavy in am9511
and won't get to it until.. after am9511. If #warning is NOT implemented, #pragma is neded for my use cases. Everything
is actually ok for me now that I have figured out the "#pragma GCC warn" work-around to the missing #warning.

And, thanks a whole bunch for the new CPP.COM ! This makes things easier. aAs an aside: If Iyou want to see a real HI-TECH C 3.09
problem: try

long = (unsigned char);
long = (long << 8) | (unsigned char);
long = (long << 8) | (unsigned char);
long = (long << 8) | (unsigned char);

That actually generates BAD C
ODE
!