Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Lukasz Sokol]

Hi,

On 04/02/16 21:33, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
> 
>> Disappointed :(
> 
> Well, such is life. I'm also disappointed that my bank account doesn't 
> contain millions. But I learned to live with it :-)
> 
> But all hope is not lost yet.
> 
>> Why was it done? I thought that pretty much everyone was in favor?
> 
> Not quite, form was also deemed important. It is a tricky balance.
> 
> To recapitulate:
> 
> There were various choices:
> 
> a) not adding at all
> b) a ? b : c
> c) if a then b else c
> d) iif()(or some variant thereof)
  
what of
  e) some kind of assignment, requiring use of braces, e.g. 
   x :=  ( if condition then truevalue else flasevalue );
or
   x :=  ( condition then truevalue else falsevalue );

... ?

It also does not clash with function names, only reuses same keywords...

> 
> From the people that responded in the core discussion, the majority was for 
> the a ? b : c
> syntax, or not adding at all (not all replied).
[...]

> Sven simply didn't want to implement the a ? b : c form.
> 
> This should be respected, each works on what (s)he wants to work.
> That is not to say that all work done is automatically and irrevocably added 
> to the compiler.
> 
> Experiments can be done, but can also be discarded.


> 
>> It isn't very pascalish, that's true, but we could implement it like
>> the proposed "inline if A then B else C" syntax... which is very
>> pascalish and cool.

So might be the 'assignment', no?

> 
> 'Cool' is a very personal appreciation. Some men like blondes, others prefer 
> redheads or brunettes.
> 
> For example, I don't think this is pascalish or cool.
> 
> Rationale for protest (there may have been other reasons beside the below):
> 
> "if then" is a statement. This is a clear and unambiguous rule.
> 
> Allowing "if then" as part of an expression is introducing ambiguity and 
> error prone.
> 
> Samples of non-desirable constructs include:
> 
> Type
>   TMyArray = Array[1..if sizeof(integer)=2 then 4 else 5] of integer;
> 
>   myconst = if sizeof(integer)=2 then 4 else 5;
> 
>   Procedure Something(AA : Integer = if sizeof(integer)=2 then 4 else 5);
> 
>   Property A : Integer Index if sizeof(integer)=2 then 4 else 5 read geta;
> 
>   Property B : Integer Read FA Write FA default if sizeof(integer)=2 then 4 
> else 5 ;

I believe the assignment form would get rid of the above... because one can't 
use an := assignment in a declaration right?

> 
> And - in my eyes - the topper in horror:
> 
>   if if if a then b else c then e else g then
>  DoSomething
>   else if if h then i else j then
>  DoSomethingElse;
> 

and convert this into
x := (((a then b else c) then e else g) then DoSomething else DoSomethingElse);
(

well actually looking at this abuse it doesn't seem to be likely to work 
...?
unless someone does

x := (y := ( z := (a then b else c) then e else g ) then DoSomething else 
DoSomethingElse);

so the immediate y,z variables have to be declared.
(and also requires a,b,c,e,g be boolean)

but quoting "everything can (and will) be abused" duh ;)

[...]

> That about sums up what was said about this in core.
> 
> As you see, it is not necessarily permanently off the drawing board, but has 
> definitely been put in the (deep) freezer.
> 
> Michael.

Just my PLN 0.02.

el es

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Lukasz Sokol wrote:


But introducing 2 new operators based on words (a-z, not 16 bit) means 2 new 
keywords and causes conflicts.
Except if "then" and "else" are used (but without "if")
x := 1 < 3 then 5 else 4;


No. Think about the ambiguities that arise if you use this inside the condition 
of an if-statement.


What if it required use of braces:

x := (expression then truevalue else falsevalue);


Let's make it simple:

The use of "if", "then" and "else" are not up for discussion.

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Lukasz Sokol]

On 05/02/16 09:48, Marco van de Voort wrote:
> In our previous episode, Lukasz Sokol said:
>> What of
>>
>> x := ( condition, true:=truevalue, false:=falsevalue);
> 
> Clashes too much with _() from dxgettext.
> 

Uh, ok. 
then what about double braces (( and )) ? Oh and using ';' for condition and 
values separation, not ',' like above...?

el es


___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Lukasz Sokol]

On 05/02/16 10:35, Andreas wrote:
> 
> On Fri 05/02/2016 07:49, Lukasz Sokol wrote:
>> That it's C, not Pascal ;) and, um. sorry I do not have a c spec on hand, 
>> does it really work that way in C - only evaluates truevalue or falsevalue 
>> not both?
>>
>> I wrote another one in another email, maybe actually having new keyword or 2 
>> is ok ?
>> and require it to be an assignment, like
>>
>> x := ( condition; whentrue:=true_value; whenfalse:=false_value);
>>
>> so syntactic sugar but not abusing function calls, but an assignment instead.
>>
> Well then how about: x *:=* *when* condition true_condition *otherwise* 
> false_condition;
> 
> How this is pascalish.
> 
Smells, like perl or python... I almost wrote the 'when version' but... ;)

without clear indication that a value is returned, it's like a statement... 

Any other imaginative way to indicate that a construct returns a value, other 
than using braces...?
as 'just braces' will confuse people using _() a lot.

(side note : 
x := (when condition use truevalue otherwise falsevalue); 

looks more like : keyword before expression template; needs 3 keywords however. 
and still looks like a statement...


) 

> Andreas
> 
el es


___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Mark Morgan Lloyd]

Michael Van Canneyt wrote:


What if it required use of braces:

x := (expression then truevalue else falsevalue);


Let's make it simple:

The use of "if", "then" and "else" are not up for discussion.


Jonas has told us to drop this, but please could I ask for a 
clarification: is that your position, or the core team's?


--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Marco van de Voort]

In our previous episode, Lukasz Sokol said:
> What of
> 
> x := ( condition, true:=truevalue, false:=falsevalue);

Clashes too much with _() from dxgettext.

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Sven Barth]

Am 05.02.2016 10:46 schrieb "Lukasz Sokol" :
>
> On 05/02/16 09:22, Lukasz Sokol wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 04/02/16 21:33, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
> >>
> >>> Disappointed :(
> >>
> >> Well, such is life. I'm also disappointed that my bank account doesn't
contain millions. But I learned to live with it :-)
> >>
> >> But all hope is not lost yet.
> >>
> >>> Why was it done? I thought that pretty much everyone was in favor?
> >>
> >> Not quite, form was also deemed important. It is a tricky balance.
> >>
> >> To recapitulate:
> >>
> >> There were various choices:
> >>
> >> a) not adding at all
> >> b) a ? b : c
> >> c) if a then b else c
> >> d) iif()(or some variant thereof)
> >
> > what of
> >   e) some kind of assignment, requiring use of braces, e.g.
> >x :=  ( if condition then truevalue else flasevalue );
> > or
> >x :=  ( condition then truevalue else falsevalue );
> >
> > ... ?
> >
> > It also does not clash with function names, only reuses same keywords...
>
> An as reusing keywords is a no-no...
>
> I wrote x := ( condition, true := truevalue, false:=falsevalue); in
previous email;
> but since true and false are constants (and reserved names) too,
>
> maybe, actually, a new keyword (pair) would be actually OK ?
>
> x := (condition; whentrue:=truevalue; whenfalse:=falsevalue); ?
>
> yes requiring use of assignment, braces, and assignments inside braces.

You're butchering the language even more than if-then-else could have -.-

Regards,
Sven
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[OBones]

Michael Van Canneyt wrote:

The only use case that would be gained is the non-evaluation of one of 
the arguments.
Yes, and that's pretty much the only use that I could think of, but it 
would be very convenient when testing for a variable to be assigned and 
give a default value it if is not.


Something along those lines: 
http://docs.elementscompiler.com/Oxygene/Expressions/MemberAccess/


I'm not saying it should be implemented right now, but it might be a 
start for some thinking.

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Lukasz Sokol wrote:


On 05/02/16 09:23, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:



On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Lukasz Sokol wrote:


But introducing 2 new operators based on words (a-z, not 16 bit) means 2 new 
keywords and causes conflicts.
Except if "then" and "else" are used (but without "if")
x := 1 < 3 then 5 else 4;


No. Think about the ambiguities that arise if you use this inside the condition 
of an if-statement.


What if it required use of braces:

x := (expression then truevalue else falsevalue);


Let's make it simple:

The use of "if", "then" and "else" are not up for discussion.


Ah ok.

so I think no /current/ keywords would be allowed either... I see.


Anything that spells 'statement' is indeed going to meet with fierce resistance.



What of

x := ( condition, true:=truevalue, false:=falsevalue);


Apart from any parsing difficulties this may present, what is the benefit over

  x:=condition ? truevalue : falsevalue

The latter being the generally used one ?

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Lukasz Sokol]

On 05/02/16 09:45, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> 
[...]
>> so I think no /current/ keywords would be allowed either... I see.
> 
> Anything that spells 'statement' is indeed going to meet with fierce 
> resistance.
> 
>>
>> What of
>>
>> x := ( condition, true:=truevalue, false:=falsevalue);
> 
> Apart from any parsing difficulties this may present, what is the benefit over
> 
>   x:=condition ? truevalue : falsevalue
> 
> The latter being the generally used one ?
> 
That it's C, not Pascal ;) and, um. sorry I do not have a c spec on hand, 
does it really work that way in C - only evaluates truevalue or falsevalue not 
both?

I wrote another one in another email, maybe actually having new keyword or 2 is 
ok ?
and require it to be an assignment, like

x := ( condition; whentrue:=true_value; whenfalse:=false_value);

so syntactic sugar but not abusing function calls, but an assignment instead.

> Michael.

el es

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[LacaK]

Dňa 5.2.2016 o 11:50 Lukasz Sokol napísal(a):

On 05/02/16 10:35, Andreas wrote:

On Fri 05/02/2016 07:49, Lukasz Sokol wrote:

That it's C, not Pascal ;) and, um. sorry I do not have a c spec on hand,
does it really work that way in C - only evaluates truevalue or falsevalue not 
both?

I wrote another one in another email, maybe actually having new keyword or 2 is 
ok ?
and require it to be an assignment, like

x := ( condition; whentrue:=true_value; whenfalse:=false_value);

so syntactic sugar but not abusing function calls, but an assignment instead.


Well then how about: x *:=* *when* condition true_condition *otherwise* 
false_condition;

How this is pascalish.


Smells, like perl or python... I almost wrote the 'when version' but... ;)

without clear indication that a value is returned, it's like a statement...

Any other imaginative way to indicate that a construct returns a value, other 
than using braces...?
as 'just braces' will confuse people using _() a lot.

(side note :
x := (when condition use truevalue otherwise falsevalue);

It look s very strange to me.

Why not just reuse C:
  x := condition ? truevalue : falsevalue ;
As stated before.
May be only for {$COPERATORS ON}
(So it will not influence Pascal language, but for those who want use 
it, can enable this syntax using switch)

-Laco.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Tomas Hajny]

Hello everybody,

Since we're getting back to the same sort of discussion, I'd like to
remind three statements (before closing this thread here similarly to the
other two):

1) Sven wrote: "There will be *no* replacement in the foreseeable future.
This is not up for discussion."

2) Michael wrote: "It is not necessarily permanently off the drawing board,
but has definitely been put in the (deep) freezer" (and he also mentioned
that the idea might be revived in the future if there's somebody willing
to implement a better alternative).

3) Jonas asked to use fpc-other for any further follow-up discussions (the
Lazarus forum pointed to by Dimitry is also an option).

Thanks for refraining from continuing the discussion about your
preferences regarding how the option not being implemented shall look like
on this list (in this thread or another).

Tomas
(one of the FPC mailing list moderators)


___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Lukasz Sokol]

On 05/02/16 11:22, Tomas Hajny wrote:
> Hello everybody,
> 
> Since we're getting back to the same sort of discussion, I'd like to
> remind three statements (before closing this thread here similarly to the
> other two):
> 
[...]
> Tomas
> (one of the FPC mailing list moderators)

Will you or other moderators, accept a request of subscription of fpc-other
coming from either automated process on gmane.org or from gmane admins?

I believe fpc-other would be a worthy addition on gmane.org.

(If only to keep the likes of me from ranting)

Not sure whether the signup has to be handled by a moderator,
but if so, please do allow posting through gmane too.

If the subscribe/signup by Gmane can be performed by non-admin, 
I am giving my hands-up for  it (might happen today, or somewhere next week, 
time allowing).

Kind Regards
el es


___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Giuliano Colla]

Il 05/02/2016 10:58, Michael Van Canneyt ha scritto:
And please remember, we do not NEED this construct; the added value is 
marginal

as I indicated.

Simply not adding is an option. Not all change is necessarily progress.

+1

C philosophy is to save *typing* time. Pascal philosophy is to save 
*development* time. Typing is but a small fraction of development.
Attempts to save typing usually end up in making the code less readable, 
and therefore harder to debug, to maintain, to share between developers, 
etc.


Just my 2 c.

Giuliano

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Jonas Maebe]

Lukasz Sokol wrote on Fri, 05 Feb 2016:


Will you or other moderators, accept a request of subscription of fpc-other
coming from either automated process on gmane.org or from gmane admins?

I believe fpc-other would be a worthy addition on gmane.org.


After your previous mail about this, I filled in the request form on  
their site. I have heard nothing back.



Jonas
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Lukasz Sokol]

On 05/02/16 12:26, Jonas Maebe wrote:
> 
> Lukasz Sokol wrote on Fri, 05 Feb 2016:
> 
>> Will you or other moderators, accept a request of subscription of fpc-other
>> coming from either automated process on gmane.org or from gmane admins?
>>
>> I believe fpc-other would be a worthy addition on gmane.org.
> 
> After your previous mail about this, I filled in the request form on their 
> site. I have heard nothing back.
> 
Thanks Jonas. 

I never did that before. Maybe they are understaffed ;) 

Thanks anyway; Next week we can start poking at their email addresses ;)

> 
> Jonas

-L.

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Lukasz Sokol]

On 05/02/16 07:03, Sven Barth wrote:
> Am 04.02.2016 23:43 schrieb "Martin"  >:
>>
>> On 04/02/2016 22:13, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:


 You mean like literally using "?" and ":" ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes. As used in C-like languages.
>>
>>
>> There was also voices for a more verbose solution.
>>
>> But introducing 2 new operators based on words (a-z, not 16 bit) means 2 new 
>> keywords and causes conflicts.
>> Except if "then" and "else" are used (but without "if")
>> x := 1 < 3 then 5 else 4;
> 
> No. Think about the ambiguities that arise if you use this inside the 
> condition of an if-statement.
> 
What if it required use of braces:

x := (expression then truevalue else falsevalue); 

?
> Regards,
> Sven
> 

el es


___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Lukasz Sokol]

On 05/02/16 09:23, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Lukasz Sokol wrote:
> 
 But introducing 2 new operators based on words (a-z, not 16 bit) means 2 
 new keywords and causes conflicts.
 Except if "then" and "else" are used (but without "if")
 x := 1 < 3 then 5 else 4;
>>>
>>> No. Think about the ambiguities that arise if you use this inside the 
>>> condition of an if-statement.
>>>
>> What if it required use of braces:
>>
>> x := (expression then truevalue else falsevalue);
> 
> Let's make it simple:
> 
> The use of "if", "then" and "else" are not up for discussion.
> 
Ah ok. 

so I think no /current/ keywords would be allowed either... I see.

What of

x := ( condition, true:=truevalue, false:=falsevalue);

?

> Michael.

el es

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Lukasz Sokol]

On 05/02/16 09:22, Lukasz Sokol wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 04/02/16 21:33, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
>>
>>> Disappointed :(
>>
>> Well, such is life. I'm also disappointed that my bank account doesn't 
>> contain millions. But I learned to live with it :-)
>>
>> But all hope is not lost yet.
>>
>>> Why was it done? I thought that pretty much everyone was in favor?
>>
>> Not quite, form was also deemed important. It is a tricky balance.
>>
>> To recapitulate:
>>
>> There were various choices:
>>
>> a) not adding at all
>> b) a ? b : c
>> c) if a then b else c
>> d) iif()(or some variant thereof)
>   
> what of
>   e) some kind of assignment, requiring use of braces, e.g. 
>x :=  ( if condition then truevalue else flasevalue );
> or
>x :=  ( condition then truevalue else falsevalue );
> 
> ... ?
> 
> It also does not clash with function names, only reuses same keywords...

An as reusing keywords is a no-no...

I wrote x := ( condition, true := truevalue, false:=falsevalue); in previous 
email;
but since true and false are constants (and reserved names) too,

maybe, actually, a new keyword (pair) would be actually OK ?

x := (condition; whentrue:=truevalue; whenfalse:=falsevalue); ?
 
yes requiring use of assignment, braces, and assignments inside braces. 

[...]
> 
> el es
> 
el es


___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Reimar Grabowski]

On Fri, 5 Feb 2016 12:08:57 +0100
LacaK  wrote:

> Why not just reuse C:
>x := condition ? truevalue : falsevalue ;
> As stated before.
> May be only for {$COPERATORS ON}
> (So it will not influence Pascal language, but for those who want use 
> it, can enable this syntax using switch)

Are you new here???

1. Because it's C.
2. Because it looks like C.
3. Because it smells like C.
4. Because it behaves like C.
5. It would actually be useful for making porting C code easier.
6. No 100+ mails thread needed to discuss what the best way is to make it look 
pascalish and not break code.
7. Did I mention that it is C (and C++, Java, JS)?

For me that is the only syntax I would like to see (and therefore use) it as I 
am used to it but knowing the pascal community I refrained from participating 
in the thread and it's really a minor feature.

Hopefully there will never be atrocities like a+=1. ^^

Please never name the unholy language on this list again.

R.

P.S.: It's all good fun, I know that C/C++ are not for everyone.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

On 2016-02-04 21:33, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> I'm also disappointed that my bank account doesn't contain millions. 
> But I learned to live with it :-)

Ah, you give up too soon. ;-)


Regards,
  - Graeme -

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Mazola Winstrol]

2016-02-04 18:41 GMT-02:00 Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho <
felipemonteiro.carva...@gmail.com>:

> Disappointed :(
>
> Why was it done? I thought that pretty much everyone was in favor?
>
>
Due to the fact that we like flame, flame and flame


> It isn't very pascalish, that's true, but we could implement it like
> the proposed "inline if A then B else C" syntax... which is very
> pascalish and cool.
>
>
Lets wait for the Delphi implementation so, we will not start a new flame.

The same applies to the ARC objects.

Best regards
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho]

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Mazola Winstrol  wrote:
> Lets wait for the Delphi implementation so, we will not start a new flame.

You mean like "wait 5-10 years until they decide independently that
they want to do it" or are there serious plans for Delphi to support
this, say, in the next version?

> The same applies to the ARC objects.

What's that?

-- 
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:


Disappointed :(


Well, such is life. 
I'm also disappointed that my bank account doesn't contain millions. 
But I learned to live with it :-)


But all hope is not lost yet.


Why was it done? I thought that pretty much everyone was in favor?


Not quite, form was also deemed important. It is a tricky balance.

To recapitulate:

There were various choices:

a) not adding at all
b) a ? b : c
c) if a then b else c
d) iif()(or some variant thereof)

From the people that responded in the core discussion, the majority was for the 

a ? b : c
syntax, or not adding at all (not all replied).

Now, the functional form (ifthen(), iif() or whatever) is not consistent with the 
semantics of other functions, namely that all arguments are evaluated.

Opinions on the importance of this argument may vary, but it must not be 
ignored.

Since the functional form (IfThen) violates above rule, it was removed again.

Sven did not feel like introducing the a ? b : c  syntax, so it was not added.

If someone feels like submitting a patch that implements a ? b : c, it may well be taken under advisement. 
I heard no-one speaking out clearly against the actual functionality (well, maybe one) or the a ? b : c form.


Sven simply didn't want to implement the a ? b : c form.

This should be respected, each works on what (s)he wants to work.
That is not to say that all work done is automatically and irrevocably 
added to the compiler.


Experiments can be done, but can also be discarded.


It isn't very pascalish, that's true, but we could implement it like
the proposed "inline if A then B else C" syntax... which is very
pascalish and cool.


'Cool' is a very personal appreciation. 
Some men like blondes, others prefer redheads or brunettes.


For example, I don't think this is pascalish or cool.

Rationale for protest (there may have been other reasons beside the below):

"if then" is a statement. This is a clear and unambiguous rule.

Allowing "if then" as part of an expression is introducing ambiguity and error 
prone.

Samples of non-desirable constructs include:

Type
  TMyArray = Array[1..if sizeof(integer)=2 then 4 else 5] of integer;

  myconst = if sizeof(integer)=2 then 4 else 5;

  Procedure Something(AA : Integer = if sizeof(integer)=2 then 4 else 5);

  Property A : Integer Index if sizeof(integer)=2 then 4 else 5 read geta;

  Property B : Integer Read FA Write FA default if sizeof(integer)=2 then 4 
else 5 ;

And - in my eyes - the topper in horror:

  if if if a then b else c then e else g then
 DoSomething
  else if if h then i else j then
 DoSomethingElse;

The last construct works more or less in C-like languages, because they mostly
require brackets in the if(), clearly separating the if from the conditional :

  if (a?b:c?e:g) {
  } if (h?i:j) {
  }

(whether or not one actually wants to use/read this even in C is another matter)

Then, let me point out also that the gain of this construct in terms of
functionality may well be marginal.

Introducing the following generic function:

Generic function IIF(Const Cond: Boolean; Const ATrueValue,AFalseValue : T) 
: t; inline;

(name and exact declaration may well differ, and Sven still needs to fix some 
inline bug)

Will solve most likely most of the use cases. I am not really a fan of generics,
but the above demonstrates its power clearly.

The only use case that would be gained is the non-evaluation of one of the 
arguments.

To introduce a highly controversial construct for maybe marginal gain is not 
advisable.

That about sums up what was said about this in core.

As you see, it is not necessarily permanently off the drawing board, 
but has definitely been put in the (deep) freezer.


Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho]

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
 wrote:
> b) a ? b : c
> From the people that responded in the core discussion, the majority was for
> the a ? b : c syntax, or not adding at all (not all replied).

You mean like literally using "?" and ":" ?

> If someone feels like submitting a patch that implements a ? b : c, it may
> well be taken under advisement. I heard no-one speaking out clearly against
> the actual functionality (well, maybe one) or the a ? b : c form.

aha, I see, Sven's message wasn't clear about it, it sounded like core
is completely against any implementation.

While actually simply no-one is working on the desired solution, which
are 2 very different things.

> "if then" is a statement. This is a clear and unambiguous rule.

The idea was "inline if" not "if"

-- 
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

On 2016-02-04 22:25, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> You're more than welcome to donate. Shall I give you my IBAN ?
> Can't promise it's tax-deductible, though :-)

:-D



G.

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

On 2016-02-04 21:33, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> Samples of non-desirable constructs include:

Thanks goodness. Looking at some of your examples, that is a whole new
can of worms, and far from what I think the Pascal language stands for.

Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Mazola Winstrol]

2016-02-04 19:13 GMT-02:00 Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho <
felipemonteiro.carva...@gmail.com>:

> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Mazola Winstrol 
> wrote:
> > Lets wait for the Delphi implementation so, we will not start a new
> flame.
>
> You mean like "wait 5-10 years until they decide independently that
> they want to do it" or are there serious plans for Delphi to support
> this, say, in the next version?
>
> I mean we are not able to introduce new features to the compiler if these
features do not exists in Delphi. We prefer flame.



> > The same applies to the ARC objects.
>
> What's that?
>
>
Reference-counted objects. Class instances are counted by reference so, this
feature eliminates the need to manually manage memory with the
try...finally blocks to free objects from the memory.

Best regards
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Vojtěch Čihák]

Hi,
I personally think that there's no place for democracy in compiler development. 
It would lead to bloat. Although majority of people considered it useful, it 
was not very pascalish.
Trunk is place for experiments and this one is over.
 
V.
__

Od: Sven Barth <pascaldra...@googlemail.com>
Komu: "FPC-Pascal users discussions" <fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org>
Datum: 04.02.2016 20:25
Předmět: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed


Hello together!

The IfThen() intrinsic has been removed again. There will be *no*
replacement in the foreseeable future. This is not up for discussion.

Regards,
Sven
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal 
<http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal>

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[silvioprog]

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 6:33 PM, Michael Van Canneyt 
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
>
> Disappointed :(
>>
>
> Well, such is life. I'm also disappointed that my bank account doesn't
> contain millions. But I learned to live with it :-)
>
[...]

:-D

[...]

> That about sums up what was said about this in core.


Thanks a lot for all explanations.

-- 
Silvio Clécio
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:


On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
 wrote:

b) a ? b : c
From the people that responded in the core discussion, the majority was for
the a ? b : c syntax, or not adding at all (not all replied).


You mean like literally using "?" and ":" ?


Yes. As used in C-like languages.


If someone feels like submitting a patch that implements a ? b : c, it may
well be taken under advisement. I heard no-one speaking out clearly against
the actual functionality (well, maybe one) or the a ? b : c form.


aha, I see, Sven's message wasn't clear about it, it sounded like core
is completely against any implementation.


Quoting Sven:

"There will be *no* replacement in the foreseeable future."

So

"Foreseeable future" <> "eternity" ? "may be implemented" : "will never be 
implemented"


While actually simply no-one is working on the desired solution, which
are 2 very different things.


Provided you know what the 'desired solution' is, yes.


"if then" is a statement. This is a clear and unambiguous rule.


The idea was "inline if" not "if"


I don't think you are right there, but it doesn't make a difference either way.

Whether or not 'if' is preceded by 'inline' is irrelevant.

'if then else' says 'statement', not 'expression'.

'?' clearly says 'operator' hence, 'expression'.

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Martin]

On 04/02/2016 22:13, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:


On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:


You mean like literally using "?" and ":" ?


Yes. As used in C-like languages.


There was also voices for a more verbose solution.

But introducing 2 new operators based on words (a-z, not 16 bit) means 2 
new keywords and causes conflicts.

Except if "then" and "else" are used (but without "if")
x := 1 < 3 then 5 else 4;

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:


On 2016-02-04 21:33, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:

I'm also disappointed that my bank account doesn't contain millions.
But I learned to live with it :-)


Ah, you give up too soon. ;-)


You're more than welcome to donate. Shall I give you my IBAN ?
Can't promise it's tax-deductible, though :-)

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

[fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Sven Barth]

Hello together!

The IfThen() intrinsic has been removed again. There will be *no*
replacement in the foreseeable future. This is not up for discussion.

Regards,
Sven
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[John Lee]

luddite_clique 1 progressives 0

On 4 February 2016 at 19:25, Sven Barth  wrote:

> Hello together!
>
> The IfThen() intrinsic has been removed again. There will be *no*
> replacement in the foreseeable future. This is not up for discussion.
>
> Regards,
> Sven
> ___
> fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
> http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
>
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Bart]

On 2/4/16, John Lee  wrote:

> luddite_clique 1 progressives 0

Please don't start a flame war.

Bart
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Dmitry Boyarintsev]

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:44 PM, John Lee  wrote:

> luddite_clique 1 progressives 0
>
> Just wait for Delphi to implement this... speaking of which, why they've
not done it a long time ago?
They could, but probably didn't do that, for very likely the same reasons.

thanks,
Dmitry
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] IfThen() intrinsic removed

[Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho]

Disappointed :(

Why was it done? I thought that pretty much everyone was in favor?

It isn't very pascalish, that's true, but we could implement it like
the proposed "inline if A then B else C" syntax... which is very
pascalish and cool.

thanks,
-- 
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal