[fpc-pascal] Bls: Bug in FPC 3.0.0 (was: Bug in FPC 3.0.0?)

2016-02-24 Thread Mr Bee
Pada Rabu, 24 Februari 2016 18:40, Marco van de Voort menulis: > In our previous episode, Mark Morgan Lloyd said: > > > (remember recent discussion about IfThen pseudo-function). > > > > More relevant to your situation, I remember discussion about adding an > > identifier to WITH to use as a

Re: [fpc-pascal] Bls: Bug in FPC 3.0.0 (was: Bug in FPC 3.0.0?)

2016-02-24 Thread Sven Barth
Am 25.02.2016 02:00 schrieb "Mr Bee" : > Maybe FPC devs should give us the "rule" or policy about what kind of change that is acceptable and not acceptable. So when we think of something new we could look at the rule and if it's doesn't comply then we don't need to bother to propose. There is not

Re: [fpc-pascal] Bls: Bug in FPC 3.0.0 (was: Bug in FPC 3.0.0?)

2016-02-25 Thread Florian Klämpfl
Am 25.02.2016 um 01:59 schrieb Mr Bee: > Pada Rabu, 24 Februari 2016 18:40, Marco van de Voort > menulis: > > > >> In our previous episode, Mark Morgan Lloyd said: >> > > (remember recent discussion about IfThen pseudo-function). >> > >> > More relevant to your situation, I remember discussion

Re: [fpc-pascal] Bls: Bug in FPC 3.0.0 (was: Bug in FPC 3.0.0?)

2016-02-25 Thread Serguei TARASSOV
Mr Bee wrote > Sometimes I just don't understand the policy of FPC devs about Delphi > compatibility. In some cases, they said FPC isn't a slave of Delphi, FPC > should have better goal than Delphi, there's the Delphi way and there's > the FPC way, breaking old codes is consequence of a change, bla

Re: [fpc-pascal] Bls: Bug in FPC 3.0.0 (was: Bug in FPC 3.0.0?)

2016-02-25 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016, Serguei TARASSOV wrote: Mr Bee wrote Sometimes I just don't understand the policy of FPC devs about Delphi compatibility. In some cases, they said FPC isn't a slave of Delphi, FPC should have better goal than Delphi, there's the Delphi way and there's the FPC way, breakin

Re: [fpc-pascal] Bls: Bug in FPC 3.0.0 (was: Bug in FPC 3.0.0?)

2016-03-06 Thread Serguei TARASSOV
Michael Van Canneyt wrote >> The Delphi way is less poor but both are risky. > Oh, why is that ? I.e. because of third-party frameworks. When programmer stays with FPC and its libraries only, the support and the compatibility are not a big problem (but some libraries become abandoned or some bugs

Re: [fpc-pascal] Bls: Bug in FPC 3.0.0 (was: Bug in FPC 3.0.0?)

2016-03-06 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Sun, 6 Mar 2016, Serguei TARASSOV wrote: I don't blame someone at all. My point is only the regret about the absent of standards on the language and common libraries like in C/C++. When there is no standards in law "de jure", the most popular implementation becomes the "standard" in fact. I

Re: [fpc-pascal] Bls: Bug in FPC 3.0.0 (was: Bug in FPC 3.0.0?)

2016-03-06 Thread Serguei TARASSOV
Michael Van Canneyt wrote > Tut ti vibral plohoi primer, po-moemu... :) > > A bad example. Plenty of language-specific forums exist. > They live, and no-one denies them their existence. Ты прав, есть много локализованных форумов, но... You're right there are many language specific forums but Eng

Re: [fpc-pascal] Bls: Bug in FPC 3.0.0 (was: Bug in FPC 3.0.0?)

2016-03-06 Thread Sven Barth
Am 06.03.2016 17:00 schrieb "Serguei TARASSOV" : > >> So in my taste the {$MODE DELPHI} should have been support not only > >> language > >> features but all common libraries too, at least RTL/DB. All FPC > >> extension/modifications could be added in FPC mode. Not easy but > >> reliable. > > > > I