Mark Emerson wrote:
[...]
The reasons in favor of the underscore are several and obvious, and today, most
languages support them.
There is only *ONE* reason that was offered by the anti-underscorist group to
exclude underscores from the language... and it was an emotionally-charged
reason.
While the group is on the topic of Wirth and 'Wirthian
nature'... I think some background might help, particularly for the
younger people
In 1985 I attended a conference in Palo Alto, California, of the Modula 2
Users' Association. There were about 150 of us there, possibly
including some of
|
| IMO, there are things that are pertinent to the core of the
| philosphy, and there are other things.
|
| Let's begin with Wirth and 'Wirthian nature'...
|
| Well, I respect him a lot, but that does not mean I have to
| worship him. And, I daresay that applies to a lot of Pascal
| lovers...
|
|
Thing is, not only do I love Pascal, but --here is the difference--
I have always used Pascal, all my life :-)
Then why did this confuse you? And why on earth would you want to
weaken Pascal's rules which happen to be its strengths? There is no
reason why a developer shouldn't know the langu
Ragnar Schroder wrote:
... they must be in the same type block.
Anyways, it's how pascal works
I'd like to echo that. Let Pascal stay Pascal. Simple syntax and
fast compiler. I for one really appreciate the Pascal way, even
though I've mostly used other languages in the past.
:-
So this is ok as well:
type
pMyRec = ^tMyRec;
var
i :tMyRec;
type
tMyRec = Record
data:pointer;
next:pMyRec;
end;
I see no reason why it should work ;)
You're taking the analogy too far now :-)
The compiler should get back with a message saying "Error:
tMyRec is not
Ragnar Schroder wrote:
... they must be in the same type block.
Anyways, it's how pascal works
I'd like to echo that. Let Pascal stay Pascal. Simple syntax and fast
compiler. I for one really appreciate the Pascal way, even though
I've mostly used other languages in the past.
:-)
Th
... they must be in the same type block.
Anyways, it's how pascal works
I'd like to echo that. Let Pascal stay Pascal. Simple syntax and fast
compiler. I for one really appreciate the Pascal way, even though
I've mostly used other languages in the past.
--
Greetings, Ragnar Schroder
listmember wrote:
> Florian Klaempfl wrote:
>
>>> I am not sure it is one of those things that need not work.
>>
>>
>> What would be the gain?
>
>
> Unless the compiler generates some sort of hint, or warning;
> the loss (i.e. negative gain) is a needlesly confused developer.
No, he should sim
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
I am not sure it is one of those things that need not work.
What would be the gain?
Unless the compiler generates some sort of hint, or warning;
the loss (i.e. negative gain) is a needlesly confused developer.
Interesting... this little bit of flexiblity would make
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005, Peter Schrei wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a problem with FreePascal 1.0.10 under SuSE 9.1. If I want to compile
> source code, which makes use of the keyboard unit, I get the following error
> message:
>
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lcurses
> Pong(46) Error: Error while linking
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, Pianoman wrote:
> Hi, how can i save some memory area to file bypassing the windows
> memory protection. For example I would like to see first four mb of my RAM
> and make a memory image on disk for contents analysis.
> How can I access certain address of memory wh
On 25 May 2005, at 14:47, Mike's Mail wrote:
Is there an active link for the archives that works, or who would I
contact to report the link, so it may be fixed?
Yes, working links can be found on http://www.freepascal.org/
maillist.html
Jonas
PS: please turn off html posting in your mai
On 25 May 2005, at 05:57, Nurmukhamed Artykaly wrote:
im trying to install fpc into my home directory.
i fetch fpc source via cvs.
You have to install a binary version of the compiler to start the
compilation, because the compiler itself is also written in Pascal
and not in C. However, t
Hi,
I have a problem with FreePascal 1.0.10 under SuSE 9.1. If I want to
compile source code, which makes use of the keyboard unit, I get the
following error message:
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lcurses
Pong(46) Error: Error while linking
Closing script ppas.sh
Since I'm a beginner co
| | apt-get install libc6-devel
| |
note: should actually be libc6-dev
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Hi, how
can i save some memory area to file bypassing the windows memory protection. For
example I would like to see first four mb of my RAM and make a memory image on
disk for contents analysis.
How can I access certain address of memory
which do not belong to my process?
Pianoman
_
Thakn you,
Marco van de Voort wrote:
GTK1 was debugged for Windows because lazarus used it at first. However
Lazarus switched to plain win32 later, so I don't think GTK2 on windows is
too well debugged in relation with FPC, and I know nobody that uses GTK2
with FPC on Windows.
I do :) -- i
Hi,
I have just joined the fpc Pascal list. I
have looked over the guiedlines and thank you for providing the list
service.
I saw a link on the mailman signup list that
pointed to past archives, but this link did not operate. I like to look
over archives so that I don't post redundant
| I think that you can create such longer descriptions of contributed
| things in FPC wiki, [http://www.freepascal.org/wiki/]. On main page
| there is a link to "Contributed Units". Just follow it, create new page,
| and list there various pages describing contributed things. Then you can
| create
Hello.
im trying to install fpc into my home directory.
i fetch fpc source via cvs.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] fpc]$ make all
make: -iVSPTPSOTO: Command not found
make: -iSP: Command not found
make: -iTP: Command not found
make: -iSO: Command not found
make: -iTO: Command not found
make compiler_cycle REL
listmember wrote:
> Florian Klaempfl wrote:
>
>> It's simply the philosophy of pascal: things which need not to work
>> don't work. The extra type gives no gain, so why should be allowed?
>
>
> I am not sure it is one of those things that need not work.
What would be the gain?
>
> You could
> It makes
- reading the code harder
- work for the compiler harder => slower and more error prone compiler
Interesting... this little bit of flexiblity would make
life that hard for the compiler?
Yes. When do you need to check for unresolved forward types?
Peter
__
- Original Message -
From: "listmember" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "FPC-Pascal users discussions"
Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 12:48 PM
Subject: [fpc-pascal] Re:
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
It's simply the philosophy of pascal: things which need not to work
don't work. The extra type gives
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
It's simply the philosophy of pascal: things which need not to work
don't work. The extra type gives no gain, so why should be allowed?
I am not sure it is one of those things that need not work.
You could look at it from a different perspective: It does not
add any a
listmember wrote:
> Jeff Pohlmeyer wrote:
>
>> To clarify, you can actually have many additional types between
>> the pointer type and the record definition, as long as you
>> don't introduce another section keyword that "turns off"
>> the current "type" section.
>> For instance, this will work:
>
Jeff Pohlmeyer wrote:
To clarify, you can actually have many additional types between
the pointer type and the record definition, as long as you
don't introduce another section keyword that "turns off"
the current "type" section.
For instance, this will work:
type
pMyRec = ^tMyRec; //
27 matches
Mail list logo
