Re: [fpc-pascal] Management operators question

> On May 25, 2018, at 7:03 PM, Maciej Izak wrote: > > all is balanced :) you forgot to handle operator : > > class operator Copy(constref src: TDynArray; var dest: TDynArray); > > and > > class operator AddRef(var a: TDynArray); > > for the line from example "d := TIntArray.Create([1, 2,

Re: [fpc-pascal] Management operators question

I don't really know why this NewPascal stuff is on this mailing list. On 05/25/2018 11:59 AM, Maciej Izak wrote: 2018-05-25 16:10 GMT+02:00 Tomas Hajny >: I assume that the functionality added to trunk (and as far as I remember also announced in the list)

Re: [fpc-pascal] Management operators question

On Fri, May 25, 2018 17:27, Maciej Izak wrote: > 2018-05-25 15:58 GMT+02:00 Tomas Hajny : > >> The sentence above is not appropriate, please adjust your communication >> and stop blaming people for revenge, etc. You'll receive an official >> statement to the previous events from the FPC core team d

Re: [fpc-pascal] Management operators question

2018-05-25 16:10 GMT+02:00 Tomas Hajny : > I assume that the functionality added to trunk (and as far as I remember > also announced in the list) was finished to the extent that it works and > may be used (although with some possible limitations), otherwise there > would be no sense in adding it t

Re: [fpc-pascal] Management operators question

2018-05-25 15:58 GMT+02:00 Tomas Hajny : > The sentence above is not appropriate, please adjust your communication > and stop blaming people for revenge, etc. You'll receive an official > statement to the previous events from the FPC core team during the > weekend. Also, note that this is a FPC ma

Re: [fpc-pascal] Management operators question

> On May 25, 2018, at 7:03 PM, Maciej Izak wrote: > > all is balanced :) you forgot to handle operator : > > class operator Copy(constref src: TDynArray; var dest: TDynArray); > > and > > class operator AddRef(var a: TDynArray); > > for the line from example "d := TIntArray.Create([1, 2,

Re: [fpc-pascal] Management operators question

On Fri, May 25, 2018 15:16, Maciej Izak wrote: > 2018-05-25 14:44 GMT+02:00 Sven Barth via fpc-pascal < > fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org>: . . > even you were against when patch for management operators was ready, so it > is not nonsense. The MO is not the part of official release and it exist >

Re: [fpc-pascal] Management operators question

On Fri, May 25, 2018 14:03, Maciej Izak wrote: . . > anyway you should not use management operators in FPC trunk, the work is > discontinued on the trunk and may be removed (not my fault - for one > person in FPC core with admin rights, emotional personal revenge and > victimization is more impor

Re: [fpc-pascal] Management operators question

2018-05-25 14:44 GMT+02:00 Sven Barth via fpc-pascal < fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org>: > Would you please stop spreading such nonsense? No one - not even Michael - > said anything about removing it. > Spreading such nonsense? Nobody can be sure anything (for me it looks like Michael has absolut

Re: [fpc-pascal] Management operators question

Maciej Izak schrieb am Fr., 25. Mai 2018, 14:03: > anyway you should not use management operators in FPC trunk, the work is > discontinued on the trunk and may be removed (not my fault - for one person > in FPC core with admin rights, emotional personal revenge and > victimization is more importa

Re: [fpc-pascal] Management operators question

2018-05-25 12:19 GMT+02:00 Ryan Joseph : > Here’s a quick demo I typed up but I don’t understand why the init/dealloc > count isn’t balanced. Calling the constructor seems to be the culprit, but > why? > all is balanced :) you forgot to handle operator : class operator Copy(constref src: TDynArr

[fpc-pascal] Management operators question

Talking about dynamic arrays I was just curious if we could us the new management operators to make dynamic arrays that are managed on the stack. Here’s a quick demo I typed up but I don’t understand why the init/dealloc count isn’t balanced. Calling the constructor seems to be the culprit, but