Since we introduced “const” keywords to generic params does it make sense to use an optional “type” keyword also? That just occurred to me as something worth discussing. No opinion either way except there’s a inconsistency now which may bother some people.
generic TStuff<type T; const A> = record end;
Regards,
Ryan Joseph
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
