Yes I plan to add matrix operation too.
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 11:04, Anthony Walter wrote:
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pasc
Zam,
That's great. Do you have any plans to add a 4x4 matrix type allowing for
both SIMD / SSE versions of vector to matrix multiplication transforms, and
matrix to matrix multiplication transforms?
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal
In case anyone interested, I just want to announce a repository which is
collection of operator overloading for vector operation using Intel SIMD SSE
instruction.
https://github.com/zamronypj/oprsimd
Zamrony P. Juhara
Fano Framework, web application framework for modern Pascal programming
lang
Am 30.01.2017 09:12 schrieb "Michael Van Canneyt" :
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> You can use words. But only words that the compiler defines. See the
documentation.
That's not what he meant. Even if one overloads operator "Less" then one
still has to use it as "<".
Regards,
Sven
__
Am 30.01.2017 08:47 schrieb "Lars" :
>
> It's not possible to define an operator like:
>
> Operator AbcXyz(r : real; z1 : complex) z : complex;
> begin
> end;
>
> Is it?
>
> Has to be a symbol?
Only existing operators can be overloaded. For everything else, use a
function.
Regards,
Sven
_
Hi,
You can use words.
But only words that the compiler defines. See the documentation.
Michael.
On Mon, 30 Jan 2017, Lars wrote:
It's not possible to define an operator like:
Operator AbcXyz(r : real; z1 : complex) z : complex;
begin
end;
Is it?
Has to be a symbol?
If one could use w
It's not possible to define an operator like:
Operator AbcXyz(r : real; z1 : complex) z : complex;
begin
end;
Is it?
Has to be a symbol?
If one could use words or text as operators this might be very
interesting, although, probably a double edged sword like Lisp where you
could embed programmin
Sorry, I asked similar question long time ago, I found it in my gmail.
Please ignore this question. However, I hope FPC will add this feature in
future release anyway.
2014-08-26 16:17 GMT+08:00 Xiangrong Fang :
> Hi All,
>
> While I try to compile this code:
>
> program demo;
> {$mode objfpc}
Hi All,
While I try to compile this code:
program demo;
{$mode objfpc}{$H+}
uses tree;
type
TIntTree = class(specialize TTree)
end;
TITTree = class(specialize TTree)
end;
operator <(it1, it2: TIntTree): Boolean;
begin
Result := it1.Data < it2.Data;
end;
var
itt: TITTree;
begin
end.
2011/7/31 Honza :
> 2011/7/28 Bernd :
>> ¹ I depend on OpenSSL already anyways, so I thought why not make use
>> of its bignum too when I need it.
>
> I hope you're aware of the FPC GMP bindings:
>
> http://wiki.freepascal.org/gmp
It seems the author fought with the same kind of problems and now
t
2011/7/28 Bernd :
> ¹ I depend on OpenSSL already anyways, so I thought why not make use
> of its bignum too when I need it.
I hope you're aware of the FPC GMP bindings:
http://wiki.freepascal.org/gmp
The section
http://wiki.freepascal.org/gmp#Extensions_bindings_.26_types
discuses extended bi
Am 29.07.2011 12:11, schrieb Mark Morgan Lloyd:
Sven Barth wrote:
Am 28.07.2011 23:04, schrieb Mark Morgan Lloyd:
I wonder if I could ask a silly question here, without displaying too
much ignorance.
I generally understand the significance of an interface in the Windows
context, where COM (or
Sven Barth wrote:
Am 28.07.2011 23:04, schrieb Mark Morgan Lloyd:
I wonder if I could ask a silly question here, without displaying too
much ignorance.
I generally understand the significance of an interface in the Windows
context, where COM (or whatever today's name for it) is integrated
fairl
Am 28.07.2011 23:04, schrieb Mark Morgan Lloyd:
I wonder if I could ask a silly question here, without displaying too
much ignorance.
I generally understand the significance of an interface in the Windows
context, where COM (or whatever today's name for it) is integrated
fairly deeply into the O
Bernd wrote:
Hi,
I am just trying to wrap (parts of) the OpenSSL¹ bignum library (large
integer arithmetic) into something that makes using it look at least a
little bit more elegant than using the naked procedural C API while
at the same time trying to not overdo it and not create a heavy code
Hi,
I am just trying to wrap (parts of) the OpenSSL¹ bignum library (large
integer arithmetic) into something that makes using it look at least a
little bit more elegant than using the naked procedural C API while
at the same time trying to not overdo it and not create a heavy code
monster instea
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 19 Sep 2009, at 22:21, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Is there any way of overloading the ^ (dereference) operator for a
user-defined type?
No, it isn't.
Shucks :-) I remember that JPI v1 had what they called "virtual
pointers" which specified a dereference function and co
On 19 Sep 2009, at 22:21, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Is there any way of overloading the ^ (dereference) operator for a
user-defined type?
No, it isn't.
Jonas
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/m
Is there any way of overloading the ^ (dereference) operator for a
user-defined type?
I'm looking at a simple Prolog interpreter written in TP3, i.e. 16-bit
code, and I think I might even have a fun use for it.
Obviously it's chock-full of segment:offset pointers but if ^ could be
overloaded
Op Tue, 8 May 2007, schreef Alexey Pavluchenko:
> the compiler (2.0.4) stops with the "impossible operator overload"
> message. Two questions arise: 1) why is it considered impossible
Overloading pointers turned out to be too problematic in the past, so it
was to be disabled. Overloading dynam
Hello all,
When trying to compile the following code
=== cut===
unit foo;
interface
type tbar = record
somefield: integer;
end;
pbar = ^tbar;
operator + (a: pbar; b: pbar) c: pbar;
implementation
operator + (a: pbar; b: pbar) c: pbar;
begin
end;
end.
=== cut===
the c
I can't seem to be able to overload the = operator for classes. Every
time I try I get the following error:
Error: Impossible operator overload
I can overload all other operators just fine. Is this a bug, or dos the
compiler just not allow overloading of the = operator for classes.
_
On Monday 03 January 2005 13:33, Peter Vreman wrote:
> > operator * (const C : Char; const Len : byte) s : String;
[doesn't work anymore]
>
> There must be at least one complex type record/string/array involved.
> Your example is only using 2 ordinal types. At the time that the
> expression is par
> Hi,
>
> just installed 1.9.6 to see if any of our current code will break and
> unfortunately I wasn't disappointed. ;-)
>
> stripped down code:
>
> -- 8< -- snip --
> unit
>StrTools;
>
> interface
>
> operator * (const C : Char; const Len : byte) s : String;
>
> implementation
>
> operator *
Hi,
just installed 1.9.6 to see if any of our current code will break and
unfortunately I wasn't disappointed. ;-)
stripped down code:
-- 8< -- snip --
unit
StrTools;
interface
operator * (const C : Char; const Len : byte) s : String;
implementation
operator * (const C : Char; const Len
25 matches
Mail list logo
