[fpc-pascal] rotating bits

[DSTRODT at aol.com]

> Michael Van Canneyt wrote:

>Well, if we're going in  that direction anyway: 
>Why not include all possible assembler  instructions then ?
>
>Let's be serious. You must draw the line  somewhere.
>I think these instructions are so exotic, they are pollution  of the system 
unit.




I agree with Michael. And I think the line is clearly drawn. The FPC  (and 
more importantly the language syntax itself) design goal, as I  understand it, 
is to be, as much as possible, platform and architecture  independent and 
doesn't need to be "polluted" by adding esoteric  functions/(worst yet)operators 
becuase they are neat on one particular type of  machine and we just program 
around them everywhere else.
Rather, if your application really needs that function, you have  a number of 
suggestions on how to implement that within your own  application, so do 
that, but I don't think the compiler should be expected to do  it for you. 
 
Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freepascal.org/pipermail/fpc-pascal/attachments/20060526/3d83dacb/attachment.html>