> > On 14 mrt 2005, at 10:51, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: > >>>> 2. I see no difference whatsoever between typ_fun and iso_fun, except >>>> the use of an extra type, which, in my opinion, does not change >>>> anything to the usage or code of these functions. If one is >>>> allowed, >>>> the other should be allowed as well. >>> >>> No, and at present there is no difference in generated code. >> >> Which means that the above example IS a problem. > > Only because the compiler currently does not support ISO-style > procvars. Olle changed it to accept the syntax (so it works in cases > you do not access variables of a parent), but it generates code as if > it's a regular procvar (which is indeed wrong). The latter is what > Adriaan wants to fix.
The credits should go to Peter, who implemented it :-) Olle _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
