I wouldn't miss not having the name of the function as a result variable
in mode objfpc, at all. I think it would be a valid addition, as a
compiler directive that was turned on as default, as not to break
existing code
Hans-Peter Diettrich skrev:
I just had to chase an strange bug, in a local (nested) subroutine.
When I made several functions (if_statement() ...) local subroutines
of method statement(), they stopped to work properly :-(
After many tries I concluded, that every (recursive) invocation of the
"statement" method was replaced by the "statement" result.
While it is possible to replace all occurences of "statement" by
"statement()", it is not clear whether this is really the intended
purpose of every occurence of "statement". This uncertainty prevents
any automated refactoring of old style function code.
IMO we should have at least an option, that a function name can *not*
be used for the function result any more, for the result we have the
Result variable. Then we can safely distinguish between function calls
(by function name) and results (by "Result"). If ever required, local
functions still can refer to the result of some enclusing function, by
e.g. qualified <function_name>.Result.
DoDi
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - [email protected]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - [email protected]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
