Am 14.11.2018 um 02:05 schrieb John Doe:
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 1:51 AM Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
<fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
<mailto:fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org>> wrote:
The compiler now correctly rejects such declarations with a "Type
is not completely defined error".
Making this not work is a ridiculous removal of a feature for no
logical reason that serves no benefit to anyone whatsoever. It just
makes records less useful, and that's it.
Just to avoid any confusion: I am talking about a typed constant
declared inside a record's declaration of the same type as the record.
Constants outside a record, even inside other records work as before.
Also there can't be that many libraries affected, because this only ever
worked in trunk. In 3.0.x the compiler simply crashed when encountering
such a constant.
I've already encountered several large libraries that are pretty
massively broken by this pointless change. You're very visibly just
making up arbitrary "rules" out of nowhere that certainly aren't
actually defined anywhere and implementing (or de-implementing)
whatever strikes your fancy on a given day.
Also:
On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 4:56 AM Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
<fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
<mailto:fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org>> wrote:
It's not possible to use typed constants as initializers for
variables.
What are you talking about? Of course that's possible. People do it
literally all the time.
=== code begin ===
type
TTest = record
public
a: LongInt;
b: LongInt;
public //const
//Default: array of TTest;// = (a: 42; b: 21);
end;
const
Test: TTest = (a: 42; b: 21);
var
TestVar: TTest = Test; // <<<< this fails, because typed constants
can't be used as initializers (would also be the case if Test and
TestVar had any other type; only untyped constants are supported here)
=== code end ===
Regards,
Sven
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
