On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 11 Jun 2009, at 14:44, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 11 Jun 2009, at 14:14, Martin Friebe wrote:
However it would be nice to have a feature like
property Foo[Index: Integer]: Integer write SetFoo read GetFoo;
property Foo[Index: Integer; Ask: Boolean]: Integer write SetFooAsk read
GetFooAsk;
The must have different Method Names, because the Setters(write SetFoo)
last argument is the Value, so it' can not have a optional Ask element:
procedure WrongSetFoo(Index: Integer; Ask: Boolean= True; AValue:
Integer);
But with different Setter/Getters that would not be a problem. In fact
they can have the same name, if they are overloaded.
Any idea if such a feature would have a chance?
It won't: http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=12737 (that feature
request was about having getters/setters with the same name, but the core
problem is having multiple properties with the same name).
As far as I know, delphi 2005 and up allow the problem in 12737 for
non-published properties.
Since array properties cannot be published anyway, the argument with RTTI
is void ?
(which doesn't mean there are no other arguments to prevent it's
implementation)
Other arguments are also mentioned in the bug report (including about only
allowing it for non-published properties). The fact that Delphi allows it is
obviously a strong argument in favour of allowing it anyway.
I would think it is a natural extension of procedural overloading ? An array
property is only a simplification of getter/setters...
That it is impossible to do for published properties is not abnormal either:
there are other kinds of properties that cannot be published. (records for
one).
I'll file a separate bugreport with the request to allow property
overloading for non-published array properties if you think it is better.
(I do ;) )
Michael.
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - [email protected]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
