Am Mo., 3. Dez. 2018, 03:45 hat Ryan Joseph <r...@thealchemistguild.com> geschrieben:
> > > > On Dec 2, 2018, at 10:53 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal < > fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org> wrote: > > > > Specialization is expensive. If specialization can be avoided, it should > be. Not to mention that the non-generic one could have more optimized code. > > Though to be sure I'll test with Delphi, we'll have to be compatible > there anyway. > > > > I think the “dummy” sym which is added after the generic procedure is > overwriting the existing symbols. In the example below (my code disabled > now) DoThis gives an error because it thinks DoThis is the dummy sym. If we > want this to work the dummy needs to keep track of existing procsyms, > unless there’s another way to get that information? > The dummy symbol should only be created if there isn't an existing symbol with that name. So maybe something is buggy there. (Also the dummy symbol should be used for a non-generic routine if the order of declaration is the other way round) Regards, Sven
_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
