On 17 Jun 2008, at 23:38, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 17 Jun 2008, at 10:56, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
The limited amount of testing done indicates that the record member
bit8_1 only causes a problem with a value of $FF, but the interesting
thing is that the result varies depending on program structure and
compiler version: Different results are seen whith the same code in a
procedure, in a 'with' statement, or if there is code in front of it
etc. The result is NOT always incorrect.
The problem can occur both when assigning 0 and when assigning
field_type(-1). I'll look into fixing it tomorrow.
Fixed. Note that
a) your test programs were specific to little endian systems
(bitpacked records have a different layout on big endian systems)
b) the internal layout of bitpacked records is not guaranteed to
remain the same over different versions (although there are no
particular intentions to change it either)
c) the second test program only defines 15 bits of the packed records,
so in the tests when checking for expected results you have to mask
out the left over bit (since it can contain garbage)
d) there was one error in the second test: if bit9_15 is set to one
and the rest to 0, the value of AsWord should be $0200 rather than
$0100.
Thanks for the good test programs!
Jonas
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - [email protected]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
