Re: 64-bit extensions

[hartmut Goebel <hartmut@oberon.noris.de>]

Michael van Acken (mvacken@t-online.de) schrieb:

 >> Oh, seams I've forgotten one point: size of LONGINT can be switched by a
                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 >> compiler option. Thus modules relying on SIZE(LONGINT)=4 still can be

Opps, this is wrong! One can select the pointer size by an option, LONGINT is
changed as an conclution.

 >What a perverted idea.  A LONGINT type that isn't a type, but rather
 >two separate types.  This is sick.  How do you sell such a crazy idea
 >to a user?  "I can't decide which type I should give you, so I'll give
 >you two types but call them both LONGINT"?

Hope my correction explains this. I still believe SIZE(LONGINT) hast to be
SIZE(SYSTEM.PTR), thus there is no other way.

 >What is you proposal for systems supporting 128 bit integers?

Nothing, btu propoply this will become SYSTEM.SIGNED_128, as long as there is
no 128-bit Address CPU.

+++hartmut