On 20 Aug 2007, at 00:56, mm wrote:
Jonas Maebe a écrit :
On 15 Aug 2007, at 03:51, mm wrote:
To J.M.
---
You said "To be compatible with Delphi". With its current behaviour,
FPC 2.1.4 is not compatible with Delphi (and no more with FPC
2.0.4).
It is at least more compatible with Delph
Jonas Maebe a écrit :
On 15 Aug 2007, at 03:51, mm wrote:
To J.M.
---
You said "To be compatible with Delphi". With its current behaviour,
FPC 2.1.4 is not compatible with Delphi (and no more with FPC 2.0.4).
It is at least more compatible with Delphi than 2.1.4
Which Delphi? :-)
You
On 15 Aug 2007, at 03:51, mm wrote:
To J.M.
---
You said "To be compatible with Delphi". With its current behaviour,
FPC 2.1.4 is not compatible with Delphi (and no more with FPC 2.0.4).
It is at least more compatible with Delphi than 2.1.4
You quoted the bug #8321. There, I see two pro
Peter Vreman a écrit :
Compelling FPC 2.1.4 to behave like FPC 2.0.4 is not very difficult.
In a program where you have "A := B - C;" (A,B,C being Longwords), it
is sufficient to write "A := Longword(Longint(B) - Longint(C));" and all
is right. The most difficult is to find which lines of code ha
> Compelling FPC 2.1.4 to behave like FPC 2.0.4 is not very difficult.
> In a program where you have "A := B - C;" (A,B,C being Longwords), it
> is sufficient to write "A := Longword(Longint(B) - Longint(C));" and all
> is right. The most difficult is to find which lines of code has to be
> modifie
Hello,
I don't want to start a big discuss on the subject (it would
presumably lead nowhere) but I would like to answer to both J.M. and
P.V. who added notes to the report.
To J.M.
---
You said "To be compatible with Delphi". With its current behaviour,
FPC 2.1.4 is not compatible with Delp
