That's a point, yeah. It's just difficult because, on Lazarus for
example, anything inside braces is coloured as if it were a comment in
an asm block. Changing this so it appears the same colour as the rest
of the assembly code when on Arm platforms would help reduce the
confusion, although t
Am 18.10.2020 um 15:15 schrieb J. Gareth Moreton via fpc-devel:
Aah, I see - thanks Jonas. That's a little awkward - presumably we
can't change it to round brackets instead since that's a bit of a
clash that can't easily be remedied, especially as such comments are
fine in other inline assembl
Aah, I see - thanks Jonas. That's a little awkward - presumably we
can't change it to round brackets instead since that's a bit of a clash
that can't easily be remedied, especially as such comments are fine in
other inline assembly languages.
Gareth aka. Kit
On 18/10/2020 14:10, Jonas Maebe
On 18/10/2020 13:34, J. Gareth Moreton via fpc-devel wrote:
> I've just seen the change you've made Sven (just looking it via diff,
> not actually testing the code)... do the standard Pascal comments
> seriously cause a problem in AArch64 assembly blocks? Do the braces
> have an actual syntactic u
I've just seen the change you've made Sven (just looking it via diff,
not actually testing the code)... do the standard Pascal comments
seriously cause a problem in AArch64 assembly blocks? Do the braces
have an actual syntactic use on that platform? That seems like an
incredibly awkward desi
I can't remember for sure - it might have been 3.0.4, so I'm probably
asking for trouble now. When I get back later I'll check for sure and
try a few things and get back to you. At least it's confirmed that it
actually did not compile!
For the curious, I'm looking to implement the optimisati
Am 18.10.2020 um 11:15 schrieb J. Gareth Moreton:
Hi Sven - thanks for the quick check. I'm out of the house currently
so I can't try it out immediately, but I'll try it out later this
evening. By the way, both my source and target are aarch64-linux (I'm
using the prototype aarch64 build of t
Hi Sven - thanks for the quick check. I'm out of the house currently so
I can't try it out immediately, but I'll try it out later this evening.
By the way, both my source and target are aarch64-linux (I'm using the
prototype aarch64 build of the Raspberry Pi OS, athough I have an SD
card with
Ah, thanks Florian.
Gareth aka. Kit
On 18/10/2020 10:01, Florian Klämpfl via fpc-devel wrote:
Am 18.10.20 um 08:56 schrieb J. Gareth Moreton via fpc-devel:
(On another note, a number of AArch64 opcodes are missing, notably
ADDS (add and set flags) and similar instructions -
This is done b
Am 18.10.20 um 08:56 schrieb J. Gareth Moreton via fpc-devel:
(On another note, a number of AArch64 opcodes are missing, notably ADDS
(add and set flags) and similar instructions -
This is done by opcode prefixes.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-dev
Am 18.10.2020 um 08:56 schrieb J. Gareth Moreton via fpc-devel:
Hi everyone,
I've started to look at developing FPC on the Raspberry Pi again, but
I've run into a snag.
The unmodified trunk does not build - it fails when building system.pp
at the ppc1 stage:
math.inc(57,7) Error: Assembler
Am 18.10.2020 um 08:56 schrieb J. Gareth Moreton via fpc-devel:
Hi everyone,
I've started to look at developing FPC on the Raspberry Pi again, but
I've run into a snag.
The unmodified trunk does not build - it fails when building system.pp
at the ppc1 stage:
math.inc(57,7) Error: Assembler
Hi everyone,
I've started to look at developing FPC on the Raspberry Pi again, but
I've run into a snag.
The unmodified trunk does not build - it fails when building system.pp
at the ppc1 stage:
math.inc(57,7) Error: Assembler syntax error
math.inc(58,11) Error: Unrecognized opcode round
fl
13 matches
Mail list logo
