On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:06 PM, Graeme Geldenhuys < mailingli...@geldenhuys.co.uk> wrote:
> So I definitely see the benefit in using (U)Int<xx> style data types. > They are a lot more obvious [to the programmer] regarding data ranges > and byte size. > Does, it also make the code less high-level? Didn't high level use the platform independent notation such as "int" or "word" to be portable across different platforms back in 60s 70s? At that time word size might vary dramatically from system to system ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Word_(computer_architecture) ) Thus a code written like this: a: Int32; would not be portable, since it requires a target platform to support 32-bit word (or at least the compiler had to be smart enough). The modern generation of developers doesn't really have to deal with that too much, due to dominance of 32-bit (as well as virtual machines, such as java and/or .net). But jump to 64-bit still caused a bit of confusion (in C/C++ and object pascal). with type names and sizes. thanks, Dmitry
_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
