Re: [fpc-pascal]RE: Defining Records on the fly:

2004-02-19 Thread Matt Emson
> ^_^ Thats how its working at the moment and I've known that FPC doesn't > do that kinda definition on the fly. My real question was why not? Because Pascal is not a dynamically typed language. C/C++ doesn't do this kind of thing either. Not 'on the fly' without any basic types defined. Matt

Re: [fpc-pascal]RE: Defining Records on the fly:

2004-02-18 Thread Jon D. Sawyer
^_^ Thats how its working at the moment and I've known that FPC doesn't do that kinda definition on the fly. My real question was why not? On Wed, 2004-02-18 at 21:34, Adam Victor Nazareth Brandizzi wrote: > You can also define a function that returns the record you need: > > function NewMyRec(

Re: [fpc-pascal]RE: Defining Records on the fly:

2004-02-18 Thread Adam Victor Nazareth Brandizzi
You can also define a function that returns the record you need: function NewMyRec( X, Y : double ) : TMyRec; begin NewMyRec.x := X; NewMyRec.y := Y; end; I think it's really better than declare a new variable and initialize it by the code. if CheckPoint(NewMyRec(1.2, 2.2)) then ... Be well

[fpc-pascal]RE: Defining Records on the fly:

2004-02-18 Thread Jeff Pohlmeyer
Since Free Pascal supports function overloading, you could do something like this: Function CheckPoint(X, Y:real): Boolean; Begin {Does something here..} end; Function CheckPoint(aPoint: tMyRec): Boolean; Begin Result:=CheckPoint(aPoint.X, aPoint.Y); end; // So you can use it either way: