Know that there have been problems with some optimisations (Jonas has fixed
some), so maybe this is reason. Regards John
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
Sent: 01/01/2005 06:49 p.m.
Subject: [fpc-devel] Optimization error causes pyacc and ple
Can't seem to get bug submission to work so I'm sending this here.
The 1.9.x distributed binaries of plex and pyacc both fail, as well as any
created from a 1.9.5 source snapshot. plex ends normally but only creates 2
states. pyacc fails with a RTE 216 on a move in procedure setunion of yaccba
[merged responses to two messages]
El Sábado, 1 de Enero de 2005 06:54, DrDiettrich escribiste:
> > ¡Serás melón!
>
> Could you please help me to improve my rudimentary Spanish? ;-)
http://hotel.jp-guide.net/job/point/melon.jpg
> (Eierkopf? ;-)
My rudimentary... I meant my non-existent... whate
Nico Aragón wrote:
> > > IIRC, any non-zero value is evaluated as "True" for a Boolean variable.
> >
> > You should not guess about any implementation.
>
> I don't. Do I?
Yes, you do. How can you know what bit pattern is stored in a boolean
variable? Using typecasts may result in silent type co
Nico Aragón wrote:
> ¡Serás melón!
Could you please help me to improve my rudimentary Spanish? ;-)
(Eierkopf? ;-)
> ¡Feliz año, torpedo! :-)
(Blindgänger? ;-)
Feliz año, Bonne Année, Happy New Year, Gelukkige Nieuwe Jaar, und ein
Gutes Neues Jahr allerseits!
DoDi
_
In the meantime I downloaded the Abbrevia package from SourceForge, and
came across several unpleasent constructs. Please let me introduce my
preferred programming model for portable code.
1) Target Dependencies
I don't accept any OS or machine specific conditional compilation in
code, except in d
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > E.g.: gzip.xyz, is this based on a gzip unit or a gzip variable or...
>
> Does this matter to you ?
>
> Normally one never uses a fully qualified identifier.
And that can become a problem, when a variable and a unit has the same
name. That's why I do not only prefer
El Sábado, 1 de Enero de 2005 09:06, Jose Manuel escribiste:
> So i think. I think Ord(TRUE), Succ(FALSE), etc. are valid Standard and
> Extended Pascal expressions, as well as the behaviour of a declarion of
As far as I know:
Ord(True) > Ord(False) = True
Succ(False) = True
...are not only
> 3: the PASCAL way
> boolean is a totally seperate type from integer types so the compiler
> knows whether you mean logial or bitwise operations. I don't know if false
That's the point. :-)
> and true having ordinal values of 0 and 1 is part of a standard or a
> borlandism but im pretty sure
