According to Frank Heckenbach:

While we're at it: would it be possible to have predefined Pascal types as size_t and ptrdiff_t (and maybe other types?) so that such calculations can be done in Pascal?

Not enough integer types yet? ;-) This can be be implemented with Type PtrInt = Integer ( BitSizeOf ( Pointer ) ); Is this sufficient? Since GPC fully supports pointer arithmetics, I don't see too much applications for this. If not ... what about `PtrInt', `PtrCard', and `PtrWord'? Greetings, Peter (* For those who have not followed the recent discussion about integer types in GPC, here is some background: Besides `Integer' (signed), GPC supports `Cardinal' (unsigned) and `Word' (don't care about signedness, in fact unsigned). These types exist in several sizes which guarantee compatibility to GNU C and introduce some portability to other Pascal compilers: GNU Pascal GNU C ByteInt signed char ShortInt short int Integer int MedInt long int LongInt long long int There are also `*Card' and `*Word' versions of these, yielding a total of fifteen basic integer types. Besides this, GPC supports a synonym `LongestInt' for `LongInt' which guarantees the longest possible integer type (for the case that GNU C introduces `long long long int' which we would implement as `LongLongInt'); same with `LongestCard' and `LongestWord'. Eighteen. Compatibility to Borland Pascal and Delphi requires `Comp' (same as `LongInt' and `SmallInt' (same as `ShortInt' in GPC). Twenty. Okay? Good. Now it *really* begins. Like all Pascal compilers, GPC supports subranges like `1..42'. This adds 2 * sqr ( 2 pow 64 ) more possible integer types to our zoo. The `2' comes from signed and unsigned variants ... let's speak of "20 + two classes" of integer types. As an extension, GPC allows these subranges to be `packed' (i.e. allocate only one byte for `packed 1..42'; the default of allocating four bytes results in faster code) which leaves us with 20 + four classes of integer types. In low-level programming you often have the situation that you want to know exactly how many bits a variable occupies. While this could be done with packed subranges, it is more comfortable to have an extended syntax for `Integer'. In GPC, `Integer ( 42 )' yields a 42-bit integer. Depending on the machine (which might not have 42-bit registers) this will probably be stored in a 64-bit word, except in packed records; however on those machines where you need, say, `Integer ( 8 )' for your low-level stuff, you can be sure that the hardware supports it. Having this for `Cardinal' and `Word' as well yields 20 + 7 classes. Adding `Ptr[Int|Card|Word]' as suggested above would make it 23 + 7 classes of integer types. Well, no big deal. I know this is a great source of confusion, but the discussion convinced me that all these integer types have their place where they are important. Greetings, Peter :*) Dipl.-Phys. Peter Gerwinski, Essen, Germany, free physicist and programmer peter.gerwinski@uni-essen.de - http://home.pages.de/~peter.gerwinski/ [970201] maintainer GNU Pascal [970714] - http://home.pages.de/~gnu-pascal/ [970125]