On 02 May 2013, at 09:04, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: > On 02/05/13 01:33, Joao Morais wrote: >> >> Why do you need a 64 bit compiler? (just curious) > > Huh? Because I was running 64-bit Windows 7, and needed to test and > resolve a 64-bit bug. My system was already setup with 64-bit Lazarus > and 64-bit FPC 2.6.0. I didn't want to read 10's of pages on how to > setup a cross compiler etc.
You don't have to read anything, it works exactly the same as a regular compiler. Lazarus nor the compiler cares at all about what architecture the compiler binary is. > Not to mention I have never had great > success (buggy end results) with cross-compilers in the past (though > that experience was all under Linux). Maybe you tried to build and install them yourself? Cross-building the compiler and its packages itself can indeed be somewhat more complicated than building a native compiler. > I personal opinion is that even though a 64-bit FPC under Windows might > not be as fast as a 32-bit FPC. They [the FPC team] introduce an > unnecessary stumbling block for those wanting to create 64-bit apps. > Linux, FreeBSD, MacOSX all have official 64-bit versions of the FPC > compiler. The Mac OS X 64-bit compilers are also cross-compilers (although the x86-64 binaries are actually a bit faster on Mac OS X, but it reduces the packaging and testing burden). Jonas_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
