On 24 Sep 2012, at 20:31, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
> Am 24.09.2012 11:43, schrieb Jonas Maebe:
>>
>> Mattias Gaertner wrote on Sun, 23 Sep 2012:
>>
>>> writeln('This gives true=',OnGetIncludePath =
>>> @CodeToolBoss.GetIncludePathForDirectory);
>>
>> The result of such an expression is unpredictable on Linux/ppc64 and on
>> AIX. The reason is that on those platforms, procedure variables are
>> actually pointers to a descriptor (their ABI requires this). This
>> descriptor is 3 pointer large and contains the address of the routine to
>> be called, the value of the TOC pointer (r2) and the value of a nested
>> frame pointer (r11; unused by FPC). It's possible to have an arbitrarily
>> large number of different descriptors for the same routine in a program,
>> although the linker will try to merge them as much as possible.
>
> Do we consider procedure variables as opaque? In this case we could
> compare the descriptor on ppc64.
You mean the code pointers stored inside the descriptor? That would introduce
other inconsistencies, like making "pointer(procvar1)<>pointer(procvar2)" give
a potentially different result from "procvar1<>procvar2". gcc also behaves the
same as we do right now. I'm wary of inventing our own conventions in this
regard.
Jonas_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
