Tomas Hajny wrote:
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 17 aug 2006, at 21:40, Konstantin MĂźnning wrote:
There are some other inconsistencies to previous versions of FPC and
Borland Pascal like assembler syntax and pointer addition
(inc(Pointer,LongInt) does not work anymore).
Please (as always) post a
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 17 aug 2006, at 21:40, Konstantin Münning wrote:
There are some other inconsistencies to previous versions of FPC and
Borland Pascal like assembler syntax and pointer addition
(inc(Pointer,LongInt) does not work anymore).
Please (as always) post a test program
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 17 aug 2006, at 21:40, Konstantin Münning wrote:
There are some other inconsistencies to previous versions of FPC and
Borland Pascal like assembler syntax and pointer addition
(inc(Pointer,LongInt) does not work anymore).
Please (as always) post a test program
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 18 aug 2006, at 13:36, Konstantin Münning wrote:
PROGRAM Original;
{$ASMMODE Intel}
PROCEDURE Test(p:Pointer;l:LongInt;w:Word;b:Byte);ASSEMBLER;
ASM
mov eax,[p]
mov eax,[l]
mov ax,[w]
mov al,[b]
END;
BEGIN
END.
This program is like the code
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Konstantin Münning wrote:
By the way, I've found the following code in compiler/cclasses.pas when
I searched for the whereabouts of maxavail/memavail and there were some
more like this in the sources:
{$ifdef HASGETHEAPSTATUS}
status:=GetFPCHeapStatus
Hi Micha!
Thanks for the amusing comments :-). Let me add some of mine.
Micha Nelissen wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2005 02:29:48 +0200
Konstantin Münning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But when there is no memory left and you need
some you can't behave perfect. Please let it be the programmers choice
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 23 mei 2005, at 02:29, Konstantin Münning wrote:
What would you suggest to return under an OS like Windows, Mac OS X or
Linux? The current free memory of the OS? Free memory + buffer cache
- minimal buffer cache size enforced by the OS? The previous +
available swap
day,
--
Konstantin Münning
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Konstantin Münning wrote:
Hi everybody!
Why in fact were MaxAvail,MemAvail,HeapSize removed from the RTL? The
explanation in install/doc/whatsnew.txt is puzzling me a bit:
- Removed MaxAvail, MemAvail, HeapSize due to their unreliability
(bogus/misleading
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 23 May 2005, at 00:56, Konstantin Münning wrote:
No. Either you catch exceptions resulting from a lack of memory and
recover, and then you have the same checking as before, except that
the
check happens atomically (by the OS: you ask for more memory
as it
may be an unintentional error but if the compiler compiles
int64 integer
as
int64temp := integer;
int64 int64temp
it would be just the intended behaviuor in any 'normal' situation I can
imagine.
Have a nice day,
--
Konstantin Münning
11 matches
Mail list logo