Hi, On 2003-03-28, Pierre Muller wrote:
>> Here are a few things about the m68k version i'd like to discuss. >> First, how well the FPU codegenerator is tested in the m68k version? >> [...] So, are there any known defects of the FPU code generator, or >> should i try to give a small example program which shows the error? > What version do you use? > the Amiga napshot that Carl created? I've compiled it myself from CVS sources. (Using a Linux/x86 box.) But i tried Carl's snapshot too, and it didn't made any differences. > Did you try the linux or the netbsd port? No, only the Amiga port. I've no Linux/68k or NetBSD/68k installed here. > The main difference, is that these two ports have > do not use FPU emulation by default. > Testing your code under these target would allow > to check if the problems are generic fpu code generation problem > or problems specific to the ports that use emulation by default. And what if i build an Amiga port which uses FPU by default? Is it possible somehow? It would be much more easy for me than a BSD or Linux install. (And after then, port my code to BSD and Linux...) >> Second, is there a chance to get '020 style addressing supported in >> inline assembly? So to use (1234,a0) instead of 1234(a0). Well, it's >> not that important, but can come handy in some cases... > That should problably not be very difficult to implement.... > just take a look into m68k/raasm.pas > procedure BuildReference > and extend it to support comma after a constant expression.... Ahem, well... Maybe i'll take a look. :] Bye, -- Charlie/iNQ [.wanna.touch.diz?.amiga1200.os31.68060/50.48mb.2,5"ide.pcmcianet.] [. .power.of.the.ancients. + .a2000. + .a500. + .commodore.128d. .] [. .cybernetic.hydraulic.android.responsible.for. .] [. .logical.infiltration.and.exploration. .] _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
