Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Serious FOR bug in latest dev build s1964
It was undefined so it was implicitly defined as UBYTE. And yes it works fine if explicitly defined as UINTEGER.
So not so serious then but I still think it's a minor bug because the compiler is clearly using the FOR range to decide what implicit size n should have - shouldn't it switch to UINTEGER at 255 instead of 256 as it appears to do now?

I accept your explanation of the assembler btw...

Messages In This Thread

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)