> On 27 nov 2006, at 13:56, Florian Klaempfl wrote: > > >> Another solution is to use one "big-enough" type. But one day big- > >> enough > >> isn't going to be big enough and it still has problem #2. > > > > It can be increased, but 128 bit is at least (128-64) bit/0.5 bit/ > > year away :) > > I really think this does not matter in any way. Afaik the routines > which are affected all only return error codes, not values. So what > is really needed is a set of FPC-defined error codes, and > translations from the OS-specific error codes to these FPC error codes. > > Whether these FPC error codes are signed or not doesn't matter, and > by the time people need more than 2**32 individual error code > conditions regarding why a mutex (un)lock failed they'll need > automatic ways to deal with that anyway.
I also think this is the right way. If you specify OS specific return codes per threadmanager, this will lead to unnecssary breakage. _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
