Hello,
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 00:37:44 +0600, "Yakov Sudeikin"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>You can just take the source code and do what you want with it and release it as
>AragonPascal or whatever.
Thank you for your interest. But I'm writting something more alike a
text editor than a compiler.
Yakov Sudeikin wrote:
I would really appreciate some comments on my question about patches
that would implement "optional", "unofficial" or "pluggable" features.
I would like very much to be able to build extensions for particular
idioms. I understand that not everybody will like this possibility.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello.
Absence of automatic construction/destruction of
classes is very painfull and it can significantly
degrade the
development process (i.e. smart pointers and RAII are
impossible). It's one of the greatest flaws of Pascal
relatevly to
C (the second thing are Templ
>I would really appreciate some comments on my question about patches
>that would implement "optional", "unofficial" or "pluggable" features.
>I would like very much to be able to build extensions for particular
>idioms. I understand that not everybody will like this possibility.
>The question is i
At 14.58 12/09/2004, you wrote:
procedure CopyFile(SourceFileName, TargetFileName: string);
auto
s, t: TStream;
begin
s := TFileStream.Create(SourceFileName, fmOpenRead);
t := TFileStream.Create(TargetFileName, fmCreate);
t.CopyFrom(s);
end;
what do you think about t
Hello,
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 18:45:53 +0200 (CEST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco van
de Voort) wrote:
>> Would it be feasible to write a different parser that outputs some
>> intermediate format to pass to code generator?
>
>It would boil down to rewriting most of the compiler, except the real
>assembl
> The problem actualy is not in automated destructors,
> but in that the Class
> types are actually pointers in Delphi OO model. That
> IS the hack, that makes some
> tasty stuff impossible (RAII)
Afaik RAII is simply that automated stuff is guaranteed finalised in a
predicatable time? (unlike e
Hello,
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:38:52 +0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>Again, what if you assign T to a global var or a
>class member ?
>>
>>Why would you want to do that?
>>
>>You still can declare "var T: MyClass" if you plan to
>use T as a local
>>reference. Obviously you only declare variabl
> On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 17:38:22 +0200 (CEST), "Peter Vreman"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Plugin support for the parser is impossible, everything is too much
> >dependent on other parts. Only assembler/linker etc. could maybe made an
> >plugin.
>
> Would it be feasible to write a different pa
>Again, what if you assign T to a global var or a
class member ?
>
>Why would you want to do that?
>
>You still can declare "var T: MyClass" if you plan to
use T as a local
>reference. Obviously you only declare variables as
automatic when you
>want to bind its lifecycle to the current procedure
Hello,
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 17:38:22 +0200 (CEST), "Peter Vreman"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Plugin support for the parser is impossible, everything is too much
>dependent on other parts. Only assembler/linker etc. could maybe made an
>plugin.
Would it be feasible to write a different parser tha
Hello,
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 15:56:07 +0200 (CEST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco van
de Voort) wrote:
>> procedure CopyFile(SourceFileName, TargetFileName: string);
>> var
>> s, t: TStream;
>> begin
>> s := TFileStream.Create(SourceFileName, fmOpenRead);
>> try
>> t :=
>>The matter has been discussed several times by the FPC core group, at
>> great
>>length. No satisfying solution on which everyone agreed was reached.
>
> I would really appreciate some comments on my question about patches
> that would implement "optional", "unofficial" or "pluggable" features.
>
Hello,
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 15:28:40 +0200 (CEST), [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>> > procedure CopyFile(SourceFileName, TargetFileName: string);
>> > auto
>> > s, t: TStream;
>> > begin
>> > s := TFileStream.Create(SourceFileName, fmOpenRead);
>> > t := TFileStream.Create(Targe
On 12 sep 2004, at 15:56, Marco van de Voort wrote:
I guess it's much alike to what happens with AnsiStrings.
Ansistrings don't work with exceptions.
Sure they do, that's why you can turn them off using
{$IMPLICITEXCEPTIONS OFF}. The same goes for class constructors afaik
(which is why we turn th
> On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 13:07:24 +0200 (CEST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco van
> de Voort) wrote:
>
> procedure CopyFile(SourceFileName, TargetFileName: string);
> var
> s, t: TStream;
> begin
> s := TFileStream.Create(SourceFileName, fmOpenRead);
> try
> t := TFileStr
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004, Vincent Snijders wrote:
> Nico Aragón wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 13:07:24 +0200 (CEST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco van
> > de Voort) wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>Absence of automatic construction/destruction of
> >>>classes is very painfull and it can signific
Do you need second C++ with pascal syntax? :)
Auto-destructors? It's very simple!!! :)
(**)
unit uGC;
interface
type
IAutoObject = interface
function GetObject: TObject;
property AObject: TObject read GetObject;
end;
TAutoObjec
Nico Aragón wrote:
Hello,
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 13:07:24 +0200 (CEST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco van
de Voort) wrote:
Absence of automatic construction/destruction of
classes is very painfull and it can significantly
degrade the
development process (i.e. smart pointers and RAII are
impossible).
Ve
Hello,
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 13:07:24 +0200 (CEST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco van
de Voort) wrote:
>> Absence of automatic construction/destruction of
>> classes is very painfull and it can significantly
>> degrade the
>> development process (i.e. smart pointers and RAII are
>> impossible).
>
>Ve
Hello,
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 13:02:52 +0200, Marc Weustink
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Procedure Something;
>> Var T:tMyClass;Auto;
>> Begin <- T auto created here
>> ...
>> If ... Then Exit; <- T auto destructed here
>> ...
>> End;<- T auto destructed here
>>
>> P.P.S. The
> Absence of automatic construction/destruction of
> classes is very painfull and it can significantly
> degrade the
> development process (i.e. smart pointers and RAII are
> impossible).
Very painfull is a bit exaggerated :-)
> It's one of the greatest flaws of Pascal relatevly to C (the seco
At 08:42 12-9-2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello.
Absence of automatic construction/destruction of
classes is very painfull and it can significantly
degrade the
development process (i.e. smart pointers and RAII are
impossible). It's one of the greatest flaws of Pascal
relatevly to
C (the second
23 matches
Mail list logo
