Yes, the recent change to array descriptors will cause crashes like this if you mix fbc.exe and libfb.a from different compiler versions, although usually ABI changes to the runtime are rare and you get away with doing it.

Just for curiosity: Does anybody know what programming language(s) today's coding - juniors use? Do they code at all? Or do they content theirselfes with slandering at the social media? As a low-order-bitter I hate to intrude, but HackerRank has run surveys since 2018 which provide fascinating answ...

Ah, cool. I'm planning to switch to dynamically loading SDL and SDL_mixer too so that I can use either SDL 1.2 or 2.0, whichever is present: I have separate graphics and audio backends based on SDL 1.2 and 2.0 but can't currently link both into the engine at once. Statically linking libtinfo would p...

Hello, I have experience compiling portable FB binaries that work on (AFAIK) any linux system since ~2011. See https://rpg.hamsterrepublic.com/ohrrpgce/Portable_GNU-Linux_binaries ncurses is so unportable that it's killing FreeBasic on Linux. Getting rid of this dependency is the first order of busi...

I recommend that you edit fbc.bas which is in the src/compiler folder and comment-out lines 846 and 847 (they could be different numbers) What do you mean by "recommend"? What happens if you don't do it? I haven't had any problem compiling and using FB on Catalina. As far as I remember. T...

I doubt you want to use TCC's assembler specifically. You want to replace GCC/binutils with TCC, right? In that case, TCC should be used as a C compiler, not an assembler. As srvaldez said, fbc already supports at&t syntax asm when generating C (it can parse inline at&t assembly (although no...

Is ~/FreeBasic/include/freebasic really the directory that copy of fbc checks for includes? Try "fbc -showincludes somefile.bas" for a file including some standard includes, and see where they are found. Of course fbc will look for includes in a path relative to where it is installed. But ...

I have an ESP8266; I should try. Serv the standard pages (Intro, Parameters, Help, ...) by any existing standard server. And create only the dynamically generated part by an fcgi module, invoked by the standard server. You need not care about all that boring standard stuff (protocols, encryption, er...

Serving http-files can get done by any server (ie. Apache, nginx, lighttpd). And if you need a special connection to any FB code, you can add an fcgi-module. libmicrohttpd isn't attempting to compete with Apache, etc, it's for embedding inside applications. I'm interested in embedding a tiny HTTP s...

This thread went very offtopic (starting with a swipe at FP in the very first post). But I always find a lot of value in marcov's sage posts on this forum, even if he's not a FB user, and hence gets (heavily) sidetracked to talking about Pascal. Back on topic... I haven't thought about this in years...

clang is already a cross compiler. check with clang -v to see apart from m64 it also supports m32. If so, use clang -m32. You're right. (Thanks for the hint, I was confused by some other error message that I mistook to mean clang wasn't doing a 32-bit build. I fixed that problem.) But still, the cl...

Java has interfaces that are also a form of MI. Yes, I think that was systemctl's point. Since only one base class can contain members, most of the nasty complexity of MI disappears. No offsetting pointers when casting to a base class, no need for multiple vtable pointers. I read that Java interfac...

BTW, pass -Wno-builtin-requires-header -Wno-incompatible-library-redeclaration to clang to silence the warnings about fbc-generated code. the command was fbc -gen gcc -arch 32 -asm att -r -m hello hello.bas without the -asm att clang spits out error messages like: hello.c:71:3: error: ambiguous inst...

I agree, clang support shouldn't be hard. It's throwing a bunch of warnings about declaring memcpy, fopen, etc. instead of including the system header files, but just disabling those warnings may be unavoidable. Indeed it's the only way that work, even for compiling manually with gcc. If I understoo...

Failed in cases that it didn't need to? (E.g. IIRC it ignores some common GCC function attributes but not all that are safe to ignore)