On 3/29/2013 17:51, duilio foschi wrote:
I had somebody install fpc and brook framework into my linux server (as probably
I would not had been able to do it)
Then I tried to compile the first 'hello world' example of the brook framework.
Soon I discovered that
- fpc configuration file is call
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Jürgen Hestermann
wrote:
>
> Am 2013-03-29 10:35, schrieb Sven Barth:
>
>> We value backwards compatiblity very high and this is part of it, no
>> matter whether these c-like operators are considered good or bad...
>
> But that's not the point here. The problem has
FPC version? Please read the requirements before installing
--
View this message in context:
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/newbie-question-tp5713912p5713913.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
__
I had somebody install fpc and brook framework into my linux server (as
probably I would not had been able to do it)
Then I tried to compile the first 'hello world' example of the brook
framework.
Soon I discovered that
- fpc configuration file is called /etc/fpc.cfg
- Fu switch must be used to
leledumbo wrote:
I, for one, see absolutely nothing wrong with += etc. since it's an
unambiguous idiom which came into use decades ago and is now almost
universally understood.
I see one: compatibility with other compilers, though I exclusively use FPC,
some people in groups I'm involved in as
>I, for one, see absolutely nothing wrong with += etc. since it's an
unambiguous idiom which came into use decades ago and is now almost
universally understood.
I see one: compatibility with other compilers, though I exclusively use FPC,
some people in groups I'm involved in asks general Pascal/
>
> No, there is no difference, because even if we would implement support for
> "function based operators" we would not implement any default ones or only
> provide them with an additional unit. So you either need to implement them
> yourself or use an additional unit anyway.
I mean, with the pr
In our previous episode, Mark Morgan Lloyd said:
> > We value backwards compatiblity very high and this is part of it, no
> > matter whether these c-like operators are considered good or bad...
>
> What is it about Pascal programmers and their assumption that verbosity
> is a prerequisite to cla
Am 29.03.2013 11:21 schrieb "Mark Morgan Lloyd" <
markmll.fpc-pas...@telemetry.co.uk>:
> I, for one, see absolutely nothing wrong with += etc. since it's an
unambiguous idiom which came into use decades ago and is now almost
universally understood. Things like ptr++ or Inc(ptr) are far more
pernici
Am 29.03.2013 10:53 schrieb "Jürgen Hestermann" :
>
>
> Am 2013-03-29 10:35, schrieb Sven Barth:
>
>> We value backwards compatiblity very high and this is part of it, no
matter whether these c-like operators are considered good or bad...
>
> But that's not the point here. The problem has nothing t
S. Fisher wrote:
--- On Wed, 3/20/13, S. Fisher wrote:
The program reads a text file and counts the number of
unique words,
and also displays the number of times the most common word
was found.
For comparison, here's a C++ program. Unlike the Pascal version,
it shows the 20 most common wor
On 29 Mar 2013, at 10:53, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
Am 2013-03-29 10:35, schrieb Sven Barth:
We value backwards compatiblity very high and this is part of it,
no matter whether these c-like operators are considered good or
bad...
But that's not the point here. The problem has nothing to do w
Am 29.03.2013 11:27, schrieb Martin Schreiber:
> On Friday 29 March 2013 10:53:04 Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
>> Am 2013-03-29 10:35, schrieb Sven Barth:
>>> We value backwards compatiblity very high and this is part of it, no
>>> matter whether these c-like operators are considered good or bad...
>>
On Friday 29 March 2013 10:53:04 Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
> Am 2013-03-29 10:35, schrieb Sven Barth:
> > We value backwards compatiblity very high and this is part of it, no
> > matter whether these c-like operators are considered good or bad...
>
> But that's not the point here. The problem has no
Sven Barth wrote:
If only I'm the core dev, I would mark the C operator feature as
deprecated
and remove it in the next major version.
[Note: No personal attack intended with the next sentence] In that case
I think we are lucky that you aren't a core dev :P
We value backwards compatiblity ve
--- On Wed, 3/20/13, S. Fisher wrote:
> The program reads a text file and counts the number of
> unique words,
> and also displays the number of times the most common word
> was found.
>
For comparison, here's a C++ program. Unlike the Pascal version,
it shows the 20 most common words. Also,
Am 2013-03-29 10:35, schrieb Sven Barth:
We value backwards compatiblity very high and this is part of it, no matter
whether these c-like operators are considered good or bad...
But that's not the point here. The problem has nothing to do with backward compatibility. Just the
opposite. If you
In our previous episode, Florian Kl?mpfl said:
> >> and remove it in the next major version.
> >
> > [Note: No personal attack intended with the next sentence] In that case
> > I think we are lucky that you aren't a core dev :P
> > We value backwards compatiblity very high and this is part of it,
Hello together!
I just found this:
http://blog.marcocantu.com/blog/class_operators_delphi.html
If I interpret this correctly this relies on the new Automatic Reference
Counting to free temporary objects. While we don't have ARC yet, we
could allow them as well, as we already have the global
Am 29.03.2013 10:35, schrieb Sven Barth:
> On 29.03.2013 02:21, leledumbo wrote:
>>> Good point. So to be consistent, don't turn it on :-)
>>
>> NEVER turn it on for me :-)
>
> If you use a compiler without a preset fpc.cfg than it's disabled by
> default. It needs to be switched on using "-Sc" or
On 29.03.2013 03:03, Xiangrong Fang wrote:
2013/3/29 Sven Barth mailto:pascaldra...@googlemail.com>>
There was already a discussion some time ago whether we should allow
operators like "or=" and such as well and the result was simple: no.
I consider this the same here.
You can a
On 29.03.2013 02:21, leledumbo wrote:
Good point. So to be consistent, don't turn it on :-)
NEVER turn it on for me :-)
If you use a compiler without a preset fpc.cfg than it's disabled by
default. It needs to be switched on using "-Sc" or "{$COPERATORS ON}".
If only I'm the core dev, I w
22 matches
Mail list logo
