On Mon, 3 Feb 2014, Martin Frb wrote:
This does not include:
^ deref
- unary minus
. accessing a member of a class/record (not unary)
To my knowledge, the . and ^ are not considered operators, they are "part of the
identifier".
As for unary minus: this is the same as a binary minus in arit
Hi!
I had a dream :)
Wouldn't it be nice if a function overload took care not only of formal
parameter list (per docs) but also of result type? So the following may work
function My(const a : Integer) : AnsiString; overload;
function My(const a : Integer) : WideString; overload;
by substitution
03.02.2014 9:42, Martin Frb пишет:
It also appears that the "." takes precedence over @
@Object.Foo
is equal to
@(Object.Foo)
well otherwise it could not compile
In this case "." is not operator.
Best regards,
Paul Ishenin
___
fpc-devel maillist -
On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 8:42 PM, Martin Frb wrote:
>
> This does not include:
> ^ deref
> . accessing a member of a class/record (not unary)
>
Are these two even considered as operators in pascal? Shouldn't []
(array-element access) be added in this case?
thanks,
Dmitry
___
On 03/02/2014 01:42, Martin Frb wrote:
http://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/ref/refch12.html#x120-1312
lists
Table 12.1: Precedence of operators
OperatorPrecedence Category
---
http://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/ref/refch12.html#x120-1312
lists
Table 12.1: Precedence of operators
OperatorPrecedence Category
---
Hi Florian!
You had done a bit of work with OP_SHR/OP_SHL it seems with the
revision (in cgx86.pas/nx64mat.pas), but now I can't seem to
cross-compile to Win32 from my Linux64 OS.. (It fails with Internal
Error 200109223 in popt386.pas, as it is most likely the first SHL
operation?) Am I
On 02 Feb 2014, at 11:59, Sven Barth wrote:
> So... does that mean that one shouldn't use "exit" inside a constructor for
> the 2.6.x series?
Not in combination with regvars. Note that this combination is not guaranteed
to go wrong (in fact, it's quite unlikely), it just can go wrong.
> If so
On 02.02.2014 10:10, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 02 Feb 2014, at 00:46, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 01 Feb 2014, at 23:34, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
It might be worth to diff the assembler generated by the cross compiler
and ppc2? Maybe I should get once a Mac for testing as well :)
It can be "fixed" by
On 02 Feb 2014, at 00:46, Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
> On 01 Feb 2014, at 23:34, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
>
>> It might be worth to diff the assembler generated by the cross compiler
>> and ppc2? Maybe I should get once a Mac for testing as well :)
>
> It can be "fixed" by removing the uses of "exit"
10 matches
Mail list logo
