On Fri, 30 Apr 2021, Bo Berglund via fpc-pascal wrote:
On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 10:52:28 -0600, Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal
wrote:
On Apr 27, 2021, at 9:58 AM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
Wait.
Is this thread intentionally moved from fpc-devel?
No. Mistake, due to mailing list settings
On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 10:52:28 -0600, Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal
wrote:
>
>
>> On Apr 27, 2021, at 9:58 AM, Michael Van Canneyt
>> wrote:
>>
>> Wait.
Is this thread intentionally moved from fpc-devel?
Seems to have started there but suddenly moved to general
--
Bo Berglund
Developer in
> On Apr 29, 2021, at 12:01 AM, Sven Barth wrote:
>
> To be precise there are two more: function/procedure variables (no special
> designator) and method variables ("of object"). Depending on what a anonymous
> function captures (or for the sake of it a nested function) it would be
>
On 2021-04-29 09:00, Mattias Gaertner via fpc-pascal wrote:
On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 07:52:19 +0200
Sven Barth via fpc-pascal wrote:
[...]
You completely ignored my first point, which in this case is the much
more significant one: Pascal does not support type inference.
FPC does not.
Delphi
On 29/04/2021 8:00 am, Mattias Gaertner via fpc-pascal wrote:
> FPC does not.
> Delphi does:
If only FPC would have strived to be Delphi Compatible. ;-) :-P
Regards,
Graeme
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 07:52:19 +0200
Sven Barth via fpc-pascal wrote:
>[...]
> You completely ignored my first point, which in this case is the much
> more significant one: Pascal does not support type inference.
FPC does not.
Delphi does:
Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal schrieb am
Mi., 28. Apr. 2021, 17:53:
>
>
> > On Apr 27, 2021, at 11:36 PM, Sven Barth
> wrote:
> >
> > Anyway, it would in principle be possible to convert an anonymous
> function to a "is nested" function, but that will only come *after* the
> whole implementation
Martin Frb via fpc-pascal schrieb am Mi.,
28. Apr. 2021, 19:26:
> On 28/04/2021 18:43, Graeme Geldenhuys via fpc-pascal wrote:
> > Hello Sven,
> >
> > On 28/04/2021 6:32 am, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal wrote:
> >> Second: the syntax is required for Delphi compatibility anyway
> > Couldn't such
Graeme Geldenhuys via fpc-pascal schrieb
am Mi., 28. Apr. 2021, 19:00:
> Hello Sven,
>
> On 28/04/2021 6:32 am, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal wrote:
> > Second: the syntax is required for Delphi compatibility anyway
>
> Couldn't such verbose syntax be limited to {$mode delphi} behaviour,
> and then
On 28/04/2021 6:26 pm, Martin Frb via fpc-pascal wrote:
> Would omitting the type info not lead to issues with overloaded functions?
Luckily others have already solved that problem. :-) Here is Java's JSR-355
and overloading is covered in Section F.
> On Apr 28, 2021, at 10:43 AM, Graeme Geldenhuys via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> Couldn't such verbose syntax be limited to {$mode delphi} behaviour,
> and then leave {$mode objfpc} free to experiment and introduce new
> less verbose syntax in the language.
Sven is having none of this and for
On 28/04/2021 18:43, Graeme Geldenhuys via fpc-pascal wrote:
Hello Sven,
On 28/04/2021 6:32 am, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal wrote:
Second: the syntax is required for Delphi compatibility anyway
Couldn't such verbose syntax be limited to {$mode delphi} behaviour,
and then leave {$mode objfpc}
Hello Sven,
On 28/04/2021 6:32 am, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal wrote:
> Second: the syntax is required for Delphi compatibility anyway
Couldn't such verbose syntax be limited to {$mode delphi} behaviour,
and then leave {$mode objfpc} free to experiment and introduce new
less verbose syntax in the
> On Apr 27, 2021, at 11:36 PM, Sven Barth wrote:
>
> Anyway, it would in principle be possible to convert an anonymous function to
> a "is nested" function, but that will only come *after* the whole
> implementation is here so that the chance for messing that core functionality
> (!) up is
Am 28.04.2021 um 00:53 schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys via fpc-pascal:
On 27/04/2021 10:13 pm, Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal wrote:
value.SortEntities(function(a, b: TEntity): integer
begin
// do stuff
end
);
It seem the beginning of the thread is missing, but I
On 27/04/2021 10:13 pm, Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal wrote:
> value.SortEntities(function(a, b: TEntity): integer
>begin
> // do stuff
>end
> );
It seem the beginning of the thread is missing, but I would like to
comment on something here - purely based on the
> On Apr 27, 2021, at 2:23 PM, Ryan Joseph wrote:
>
> But why would it do that when we could use an alternate code path that uses
> nested functions instead? Maybe I'm not being clear but we can do BOTH
> depending the situation when one is better than the other. This is just an
>
Am 27.04.2021 um 19:56 schrieb Michael Van Canneyt via fpc-pascal:
On Tue, 27 Apr 2021, Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal wrote:
On Apr 27, 2021, at 9:58 AM, Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
Wait.
I asked Sven to make sure that nested functions are under ALL
circumstances
usable as closures or
On Tue, 27 Apr 2021, Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal wrote:
On Apr 27, 2021, at 9:58 AM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
Wait.
I asked Sven to make sure that nested functions are under ALL circumstances
usable as closures or can be used instead of anonymous functions.
Pas2js already supports
> On Apr 27, 2021, at 9:58 AM, Michael Van Canneyt
> wrote:
>
> Wait.
>
> I asked Sven to make sure that nested functions are under ALL circumstances
> usable as closures or can be used instead of anonymous functions.
>
> Pas2js already supports this, and I want FPC and Pas2JS to be
20 matches
Mail list logo
