On 16 Nov 2009, at 19:56, Anthony Walter wrote:
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Jonas Maebe > wrote:
For this reason, I think the Delphi operator naming decision is
actually
better than FPC's. Limiting them to classes is another matter.
Jonas
Jonas,
Delphi doesn't limit operator overlo
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Jonas Maebe wrote:
> For this reason, I think the Delphi operator naming decision is actually
> better than FPC's. Limiting them to classes is another matter.
>
>
> Jonas
Jonas,
Delphi doesn't limit operator overloading to classes. You can also add
overloading to
In our previous episode, J?rgen Hestermann said:
> > In
> > general we try to be Delphi compatible as much as time and
> > backward compatibility permits.
>
> I hate it if bugs or illogical things are copied from Delphi. It may be
> the case that Delphi vanishes one day. Then we still would have
On 16 Nov 2009, at 18:55, Anthony Walter wrote:
I think Delphi should be using actual operators like + * and / instead
of Add, Multiply, Divide, but then again I think the named results of
FPC are stranger. What's wrong with using the type in the declaration
and Result in the implementation?
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Jürgen Hestermann
wrote:
> I hate it if bugs or illogical things are copied from Delphi. It may be the
> case that Delphi vanishes one day. Then we still would have all these bugs
> in FPC/Lazarus cast in stone forever. I think we should not slavish copy
> whateve
In
general we try to be Delphi compatible as much as time and
backward compatibility permits.
I hate it if bugs or illogical things are copied from Delphi. It may be the
case that Delphi vanishes one day. Then we still would have all these bugs in
FPC/Lazarus cast in stone forever. I think we
Anthony Walter wrote on Mon, 16 Nov 2009:
Jonas:
I noticed the bit you posted which looked like this:
{$define cdecl:=delphicdecl}
Does this mean I can redefine patterns as seen by FPC?
Yes. They are basically equivalent to C macro's, except that they do
not support parameters. See
htt
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Eduardo Morras wrote:
>
> One question, why do you reimplement libc<->fpc wrapping lib? This function
> is in the BaseUnix unit as fpnanosleep.
I am redoing my game engine is which based on a simple concept. Bare
bones code. The library is called bare actually a
On 16 Nov 2009, at 15:51, Jonas Maebe wrote:
The main problem with changing it now would obviously be that it
would break backwards compatibility with existing code. It could
still be done in Delphi mode onlu, of course, but changing the
behaviour of a calling convention (which is normally
At 04:33 16/11/2009, you wrote:
>Hi all. I am new to fpc and linux in general, though I do have a long
>time experience with Delphi.
>
>I was writing some code basic system (using the libc library) when I
>ran across the following problem .. some code:
>
>const
> libc = 'libc.so.6';
>
>type
> TT
Michael Van Canneyt schrieb:
In reality it's always the FPC team that is f*d when an
incompatibility arises.
I refuse to use Borland again. I have their Delphi and the manuals as
well on my cupboard, but since I saw Lazarus und fpc the first time, I
decided to move on.
Holger
__
On 16 Nov 2009, at 16:19, Marco van de Voort wrote:
The fpc-devel group and/or irc.
The fpc-devel mailing list is best, I think, if only because the
answers will be indexed by Google.
Jonas
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepasca
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
> The fpc-devel group and/or irc.
On freenode I've been to #fpc a few times over the years. My handle is sysRPL.
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepas
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Jonas Maebe wrote:
> I was merely answering your question why we do it differently than Delphi,
> even though Delphi is generally the de facto standard. I was trying to
> explain that we did not do it differently simply because our way was the
> right one and Delph
In our previous episode, Anthony Walter said:
> To Marco:
>
> Thanks for that link. I will read that rocument and try to get started
> with the developer repository and build environment this week. If I
> have and questions (which google and my own experimentation can't
> answer), where would be
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009, Anthony Walter wrote:
This is because Delphi belongs to is a commercial enterprise, and it
is in their best interested not to bend over backwards to work with a
free competing product.
The power I felt FPC has had was it's compatibility with Delphi. FPC
maintained compati
This is because Delphi belongs to is a commercial enterprise, and it
is in their best interested not to bend over backwards to work with a
free competing product.
The power I felt FPC has had was it's compatibility with Delphi. FPC
maintained compatibility with the languages and even with the clas
On 16 Nov 2009, at 15:29, Anthony Walter wrote:
"FreePascal did this before something else so we shouldn't change"
Forgetting the whole argument about who was actually first, I have to
ask what difference does it make?
I was merely answering your question why we do it differently than
Delp
In our previous episode, Anthony Walter said:
> I probably should, but I've never worked on a community project
> before. I don't know the ins and outs of hooking up to the developer
> repository, getting the build environment working, discussing and
> submitting my changes, testing those changes,
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009, Anthony Walter wrote:
As I said in my introduction. I am new to Linux and FPC. I've used
them both for maybe 8 years, but not seriously.
On the Linux side for years I've just used it for minimal compiling
and a lot of web browser.
On the FPC I've fired it up from time to
I probably should, but I've never worked on a community project
before. I don't know the ins and outs of hooking up to the developer
repository, getting the build environment working, discussing and
submitting my changes, testing those changes, and moving them into the
official version.
If anyone
>
> In my opinion, there is an incompatibility. Fix it.
If you care about it, provide a usable patch.
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
As I said in my introduction. I am new to Linux and FPC. I've used
them both for maybe 8 years, but not seriously.
On the Linux side for years I've just used it for minimal compiling
and a lot of web browser.
On the FPC I've fired it up from time to time over the years (and read
the website, mail
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009, Anthony Walter wrote:
Actually the help does. The first thing I did when I got to work with
morning was top open my Delphi 7 help file and typed "const" then
choose the topic "constant (const) parameters".
Definitely not in the printed manual of D7, which I consulted pri
On 16 Nov 2009, at 15:01, Anthony Walter wrote:
Jonas, why is FPC emulating C when it could simply follow the Delphi
way and prevent these incompatibilities?
I think that FPC's behaviour predates the existence of Delphi.
Jonas
___
fpc-pascal maill
I assume you replied so quickly you did not get the chance to read my
crafted and tested reply. You may have been typing the same time I was
:)
Please go back and read my message and note the tests section.
Jonas, why is FPC emulating C when it could simply follow the Delphi
way and prevent these
On 16 Nov 2009, at 14:50, Anthony Walter wrote:
There is a problem with the above code on FPC when you change calling
conventions of A.
Const indeed behaves differently depending on the calling convention.
With register and stdcall, we emulate Delphi. With mwpascal, we
emulate MetroWerks
On Monday 16 November 2009 08:59:50 Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
> It is nowhere written in the Delphi specs that const parameters
> are passed by reference. It is often so, but is by no means guaranteed.
>
There is a sentence in Delphi 7 "Language Guide" in chapter 12 "Parameters and
function res
Actually the help does. The first thing I did when I got to work with
morning was top open my Delphi 7 help file and typed "const" then
choose the topic "constant (const) parameters".
Quote:
"Using const allows the compiler to optimize code for structured- and
string-type parameters."
Using cons
On Sun, 15 Nov 2009, Anthony Walter wrote:
Hi all. I am new to fpc and linux in general, though I do have a long
time experience with Delphi.
I was writing some code basic system (using the libc library) when I
ran across the following problem .. some code:
const
libc = 'libc.so.6';
type
Hi all. I am new to fpc and linux in general, though I do have a long
time experience with Delphi.
I was writing some code basic system (using the libc library) when I
ran across the following problem .. some code:
const
libc = 'libc.so.6';
type
TTimeSpec = record
Sec: Cardinal; { Seco
31 matches
Mail list logo
