On Saturday, October 13, 2018, Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
> A single test program compiled at a single optimization level does not
> demonstrate how a particular compiler generates code in all possible
> situations. In addition, the ABI specification trumps a particular
> compiler's implementation in an
On 13/10/18 16:45, Dmitry Boyarintsev wrote:
On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 9:55 AM Dmitry Boyarintsev
mailto:skalogryz.li...@gmail.com>> wrote:
ObjC language doesn't have its own boolean type.
No. I'm convienced now: http://wiki.freepascal.org/ObjC_Bool
It appears the the compiler is always cl
On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 9:55 AM Dmitry Boyarintsev <
skalogryz.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ObjC language doesn't have its own boolean type.
>
No. I'm convienced now: http://wiki.freepascal.org/ObjC_Bool
It appears the the compiler is always clearing the entire register to pass
the paramater. No mat
On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 3:08 AM Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
>
> Because introducing a type in a language and naming it after some library
> is
> not done. objcbool at least refers to another language.
>
ObjC language doesn't have its own boolean type.
It's either C "_Bool" for ARM, or "a signed c
Dmitry Boyarintsev schrieb am Sa., 13. Okt.
2018, 01:57:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 6:48 PM Sven Barth via fpc-devel <
> fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org> wrote:
>
>> Not quite: the Boolean16, Boolean32 and Boolean64 types were introduced
>> because the libraries provided by GTK required a 4-Byte bo
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018, Dmitry Boyarintsev wrote:
2) why the were they named booleanN rather than gtkboolean or something?
(I'm referring to the suggestion of using objcbool name. It seem to fit)
Because introducing a type in a language and naming it after some library is
not done. objcbool at
