Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Problem With New Compiler

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bernhard Fomm
    replied
    The error of ISFILE9.02 is a known bug.
    It has changed the functionality and are errors on Windows 7!

    Leave a comment:


  • Jim Seekamp
    replied
    Unfortunately, the application is huge, and has 5 exe modules, and this is in the main module that is over 1mb compiled...

    I tried compressing in the one compiled by 9.01 and decompressing with the one compiled in 9.02, and that worked, so it's in the compression. The code has no apparent errors and is not that complex. The register none statement has been in the code for a long time. But thanks for the suggestions

    Leave a comment:


  • Brian Chirgwin
    replied
    Example?

    Originally posted by Jim Seekamp View Post
    I'm having trouble with some compression code I've used for a long time (7-8 years) with no problems til now.

    9.01 compiles the code fine
    9.02 compiles the code with no errors
    BUT the result in 9.02 -- with the exact same code-- is jarbled.

    Did something change as far as variables or limitations in 9.02 ???
    One this to try is #Register None at the top of the application.

    Can you upload a simplified example? When I have a corruption like this I usually make a copy of the source and cut out as much as a can In most cases, I find I made a stupid, hard to find error. Sometimes I can't find it and post the simplified problem.

    If the PB 9.02 application writes out data, can the 9.02 read it? How about the PB 9.01 version. This may help indicate if the problem is in the read or write portion of the code.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Zale
    replied
    There is no way of knowing by mystical/magical means. {smile} However, given performance history, it is very unlikely that it has anything to do with the compiler. Possible, but unlikely. If you stay with 9.01, it's likely that a similar situation will arise at some point, when you change your code to cause a different form of (unwanted) corruption.

    I would highly recommend that you use 9.02 to debug and locate the real source of the problem. PowerBASIC Tech Support will help, as always, just ask.

    Bob Zale
    PowerBASIC Inc.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jim Seekamp
    replied
    OK - sorry Bob...
    What I mean is that the data the compression code restores to now turns out incorrect -- it looks "jarbled" when restored. The backup and restore have both worked for 7-8 years and we have hundreds of customers successfully using it.
    But with 9.02 it does not work the same.
    Just curious as to any changes in the compiler.
    For now I went back to the 9.01 compiler
    Jim

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Zale
    replied
    Do you think you could provide a definition of jarbling?

    That might help a good deal.

    Bob Zale
    PowerBASIC Inc.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jim Seekamp
    started a topic Problem With New Compiler

    Problem With New Compiler

    I'm having trouble with some compression code I've used for a long time (7-8 years) with no problems til now.

    9.01 compiles the code fine
    9.02 compiles the code with no errors
    BUT the result in 9.02 -- with the exact same code-- is jarbled.

    Did something change as far as variables or limitations in 9.02 ???
Working...
X