Re: [fpc-devel] Idea/question about a language (syntax) extension
Flávio Etrusco wrote: > WhAny alternatives? Using properties. -Michael ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Idea/question about a language (syntax) extension
On 22 Dec 2009, at 06:27, Alexander Klenin wrote: I'd say rather something like CallSomething(Arg1:=10, Arg2:='Test') which is already sort-of-supported by Delphi for automation classes: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/885942/named-optional-parameters-in-delphi FPC also already supports it in that scenario. Jonas ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Idea/question about a language (syntax) extension
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 5:14 AM, Michael Schnell wrote: > Flávio Etrusco wrote: >> WhAny alternatives? > > Using properties. > > -Michael Err, I don't get it. How do I avoid the situation I mentioned with the "class/record fields" alternative using properties? Best regards, Flávio ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
[fpc-devel] FPC 2.5.x changelog?
Hi, I'm looking for the changelog of FPC, I want to know what new features and changes were added, but I couln't find it on the FPC's site. Where can I find it? Leonardo M. Ramé http://leonardorame.blogspot.com ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Idea/question about a language (syntax) extension
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 6:34 AM, Jonas Maebe wrote: > > On 22 Dec 2009, at 06:27, Alexander Klenin wrote: > >> I'd say rather something like >> >> CallSomething(Arg1:=10, Arg2:='Test') >> >> which is already sort-of-supported by Delphi for automation classes: >> >> >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/885942/named-optional-parameters-in-delphi > > FPC also already supports it in that scenario. > > > Jonas Interesting. I guess this situation is little easier because the way Automation procedure calls pass parameters, right? But what's your opinion on extending it to standard procedures? Best regards, Flávio ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [SPAM] [fpc-devel] FPC 2.5.x changelog?
On 22 Dec 2009, at 12:59, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote: Hi, I'm looking for the changelog of FPC, I want to know what new features and changes were added, but I couln't find it on the FPC's site. Where can I find it? There's only the svn log. Jonas___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Idea/question about a language (syntax) extension
On 22 Dec 2009, at 13:00, Flávio Etrusco wrote: On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 6:34 AM, Jonas Maebe > wrote: On 22 Dec 2009, at 06:27, Alexander Klenin wrote: I'd say rather something like CallSomething(Arg1:=10, Arg2:='Test') which is already sort-of-supported by Delphi for automation classes: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/885942/named-optional-parameters-in-delphi FPC also already supports it in that scenario. Interesting. I guess this situation is little easier because the way Automation procedure calls pass parameters, right? I have no idea. I know it exists, but I have no clue at all about how it works. But what's your opinion on extending it to standard procedures? I have no opinion on that. Jonas___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Idea/question about a language (syntax) extension
Flávio Etrusco schrieb: > But what's your > opinion on extending it to standard procedures? I see no sense in doing so. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
[fpc-devel] 'cpstrnew' branch is available on GitHub
Hi, I added the 'cpstrnew' branch to the Git mirror repository on GitHub. http://github.com/graemeg/freepascal/tree/cpstrnew If you are using the Git repository, there is nothing new you need to do. The usual 'git pull' will automatically bring in the new branch details. After the pull you will see the new branch is available via the 'git branch -r' command. Regards, - Graeme - -- fpGUI Toolkit - a cross-platform GUI toolkit using Free Pascal http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] 'cpstrnew' branch is available on GitHub
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: > Hi, > > I added the 'cpstrnew' branch to the Git mirror repository on GitHub. I forgot to mention - for those new to Git and the Git mirror of FPC. If you think pulling in 4 branches will be a huge download, you will be pleasantly surprised. I just did a full clone (full history) of the FPC git mirror. It was a total download of only 62MB. That download includes the following branches: 'master' (trunk), 'fixes_2.2', 'fixes_2.4' and 'cpstrnew' $ git clone git://github.com:graemeg/freepascal.git fpc_github.git Initialized empty Git repository in /opt/git/fpc_github.git/.git/ remote: Counting objects: 132211, done. remote: Compressing objects: 100% (31167/31167), done. remote: Total 132211 (delta 101879), reused 130631 (delta 100498) Receiving objects: 100% (132211/132211), 62.03 MiB | 479 KiB/s, done. Resolving deltas: 100% (101879/101879), done. Checking out files: 100% (11419/11419), done. $ cd fpc_github.git/ $ git branch -a * master remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master remotes/origin/cpstrnew remotes/origin/fixes_2.4 remotes/origin/fixes_2_2 remotes/origin/master Regards, - Graeme - -- fpGUI Toolkit - a cross-platform GUI toolkit using Free Pascal http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Idea/question about a language (syntax) extension
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Florian Klaempfl wrote: > Flávio Etrusco schrieb: >> But what's your >> opinion on extending it to standard procedures? > > I see no sense in doing so. > Do you mean this syntax or the feature at all? Do you know another way to solve or help the problem I proposed? Would you prefer implementing another feature (e.g. class or method versioning) instead? Best regards, Flávio ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
