On 5/18/06, Пётр Косаревский с mail.ru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
L> Can someone tell me how slow/fast a dynamic array is compared to a fixed
one? Say you used
L> a dynamic array of chars or dynamic array of shortstrings - would the
dynamic array be
L> slow on a general basis? Maybe we will hav
But it's only a matter of time:
probably Windows will become totally utf16 (not really unicode, but
at least utf16) really soon (at least in newer versions in a way
incompatible with current ones).
A small correction, utf16 is a type of unicode.
thanks,
--
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
__
L> Can someone tell me how slow/fast a dynamic array is compared to a fixed
one? Say you used
L> a dynamic array of chars or dynamic array of shortstrings - would the
dynamic array be
L> slow on a general basis? Maybe we will have to resort to benchmarks using
the cpu timer.
L> And then there is
Op Thu, 18 May 2006, schreef L505:
> That's one solution, that's not the only solution.
Very right. It is a trade-off. Do you fix the shortstring issue
and continue to get their benefits, or do you abandon them,
rewrite large parts of the compiler and pay the performance/memory
usage price?
> > Also assembler symbols/labels should get extended to strings > 255 in the
> > future because there is already a bug open in which it is demonstrated that
> > it
> > is possible to create too long labels which makes a program uncompilable.
> > Or some scheme derived which makes sure that labels
Op Thu, 18 May 2006, schreef Thomas Schatzl:
> > > Additionally even the ppc64 compiler isn't able to cycle when
> > > compiled with -Cg because of the shortstring limitation, a few
> > > symbols get truncated, which makes the assembler fail.
> > > This is because the assembler syntax for declar
Hello,
>From: Dani?l Mantione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Op Thu, 18 May 2006, schreef Thomas Schatzl:
>> Also assembler symbols/labels should get extended to strings > 255
>>in the future because there is already a bug open in which it is
>>demonstrated that it is possible to create too long labels wh
Op Thu, 18 May 2006, schreef Thomas Schatzl:
> Also assembler symbols/labels should get extended to strings > 255 in the
> future because there is already a bug open in which it is demonstrated that it
> is possible to create too long labels which makes a program uncompilable.
> Or some scheme d
Hello,
From: Jonas Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On 17 mei 2006, at 20:19, L505 wrote:
We wouldn't have to use sysutils yet.. we could make a custom Dos unit
which used "longstrings" instead of short strings, but keep the old
Dos unit for compatibility..
This still means that someone has to fini
On 18 mei 2006, at 18:17, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
This sounds like a easy way or doing it, thanks!
Can one change the installation path with the "make install" command?
make install INSTALL_PREFIX=/opt
Jonas
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@l
On 5/18/06, Joost van der Sluis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you upgrade from svn, just do 'make install', then 2.0.x will be
placed in /usr/local/lib/fpc/2.0.x and 2.1.x in /usr/local/lib/fpc/2.1.1
Change your fpc.cfg to use $fpcversion instead of 2.x.x
This sounds like a easy way or doing i
On Thu, 2006-05-18 at 17:07 +0200, Daniël Mantione wrote:
> Op Thu, 18 May 2006, schreef Graeme Geldenhuys:
> > Hi,
> > What is a recommend setup so I can easily switch between the 2.0.2 and
> > 2.0.x and 2.1.1 versions for testing fixes/changes and what impact
> > they would have on my application
Op Thu, 18 May 2006, schreef Graeme Geldenhuys:
> Hi,
> What is a recommend setup so I can easily switch between the 2.0.2 and
> 2.0.x and 2.1.1 versions for testing fixes/changes and what impact
> they would have on my applications.
>
> I just got a confirmation from Mantis that one of the bug
Hi,
What is a recommend setup so I can easily switch between the 2.0.2 and
2.0.x and 2.1.1 versions for testing fixes/changes and what impact
they would have on my applications.
I just got a confirmation from Mantis that one of the bugs I reported
has been fixed in 2.0.x and a fix and possible s
On 18 mei 2006, at 13:54, Schindler Karl-Michael wrote:
I tried to do the fpc tests and encountered a bug. The file "tests/
test/cg/obj/darwin/powerpc/tcext5.o" was missing. I created it with
gcc -c cext5.c from tests/test/cg/obj/tcext5.c. Then the test run
went through. However, I am not s
Hi
I tried to do the fpc tests and encountered a bug. The file "tests/
test/cg/obj/darwin/powerpc/tcext5.o" was missing. I created it with
gcc -c cext5.c from tests/test/cg/obj/tcext5.c. Then the test run
went through. However, I am not sure how cext5.c should be compiled.
The notes in /tr
On ut , 2006-05-09 at 09:35 +0200, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> I heard that the gtk1 libs under FreeBSD are libglib-12.so, libgdk-12.so and
> libgtk-12.so.
> But at the moment the linklib directive for FreeBSD defines
> {$ifdef FreeBSD}
> gtkdll='gtk12';
> {$linklib gtk12}
> without t
Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
> On 17 mei 2006, at 19:59, L505 wrote:
>
>> What do you guys thing about the idea to implement what DEC Pascal and
>> Extended Pascal
>> have - a 2 byte length ShortString (MediumString?), uprdade *some* of
>> the path related
>> ShortStrings to be MediumString[1000] instead
18 matches
Mail list logo
