J. Gareth Moreton via fpc-devel <fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org> schrieb am Mi., 19. Juli 2023, 19:53:
> Hi everyone, > > So I've come across a bit of awkwardness with the compiler. I'm not > sure if it's a well-defined rule that I've overlooked, but in a > for-loop, you can't use a 64-bit control variable when compiling for > i386-win32 (and presumably other 32-bit platforms), but you can under > x86_64-win64. In my case, the upper bound is a 64-bit variable (of type > TConstExprInt... a record type in the compiler source), so downsizing is > not ideal (although I will likely put in code that will error out if the > upper bound is too large due to the risk of an malicious inputs causing > said bound to equal 2^63 - 1 or 2^64 - 1). > > My example aside, should it be that there's a situation where pure Free > Pascal code can build on a 64-bit compiler but not a 32-bit compiler? > IFpermitting 64-bit control variables is too difficult for 32-bit > systems, should they be forbidden entirely or at least throw a warning? > > Kit > > P.S. As the title implies, trying to use a QWord or Int64 as a for-loop > control variable under i386-win32 causes an "Ordinal expression > expected" error, but compiles without incident on x86_64-win64. > It is indeed by design that not every integer type is a suitable index variable for a for-loop. In this case that a 64-bit variable can't be used on a platform with less than 64-bit width. The same is probably also true for 32-bit variables on platforms with less width (e.g. i8086, AVR, Z80). Cross platform code needs to cater for this accordingly. Regards, Sven >
_______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
