On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 5:47 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
wrote:
> On 30.07.2017 20:55, Marcos Douglas B. Santos wrote:
>>
>> I would like to instantiate my attribute only once inside constructor
>> and then it will be "const" or "final", I mean, immutable.
>> Today it is not possible, right? Any
On 30.07.2017 20:55, Marcos Douglas B. Santos wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Maciej Izak wrote:
>> 2017-07-30 18:37 GMT+02:00 Marcos Douglas B. Santos :
>>>
>>> 1. Is this by design?
>>
>>
>> Yes. To disallow this you need to use {$J-} directive.
>
> I know that we can use this "hack"
On 30/07/17 19:55, Marcos Douglas B. Santos wrote:
I would like to instantiate my attribute only once inside constructor
and then it will be "const" or "final", I mean, immutable.
Today it is not possible, right? Any thoughts to the future?
It is not what you are asking for, but you can do this:
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Maciej Izak wrote:
> 2017-07-30 18:37 GMT+02:00 Marcos Douglas B. Santos :
>>
>> 1. Is this by design?
>
>
> Yes. To disallow this you need to use {$J-} directive.
I know that we can use this "hack" in local functions/methods, but in
an attribute... What is the go
2017-07-30 18:37 GMT+02:00 Marcos Douglas B. Santos :
> 1. Is this by design?
>
Yes. To disallow this you need to use {$J-} directive.
> 2. Is there a way to declare attributes "final" like Java does?
>
No for constants.
--
Best regards,
Maciej Izak
__
The following code is compilable.
I'm using a private const with type defined and I can change it in the
constructor.
1. Is this by design?
2. Is there a way to declare attributes "final" like Java does?
=== begin ===
type
TFoo = class
private
const INT: Integer = 0;
public
construc
Am 30.07.2017 12:37 schrieb "Bo Berglund" :
>
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2017 09:33:59 +0200, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> >> The application was started back in Delphi7 times when "string"
> >> actually meant AnsiString and was a 1-byte per element container.
> >
> >You could always use RawByteSt
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 5:06 AM, Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2017, Marcos Douglas B. Santos wrote:
>
>> FPC/Lazarus always tried stay compatible with Delphi... thus, why the
>> FPC XML classes is so different than Delphi classes?
>
>
> Because the FPC classes predate the Delphi
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 4:30 AM, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
wrote:
>> I have a FPC/Lazarus project that will be compatible with Delphi. I
>> would like to know whether I need to create wrappers to encapsulate
>> the differences between them or there is a simple way to do that.
>>
>> A 3rd lib could
On Sun, 30 Jul 2017 09:33:59 +0200, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
wrote:
>> The application was started back in Delphi7 times when "string"
>> actually meant AnsiString and was a 1-byte per element container.
>
>You could always use RawByteString or a string with a fixed codepage
>instead if plain An
On Sat, 29 Jul 2017, Marcos Douglas B. Santos wrote:
Hi,
FPC/Lazarus always tried stay compatible with Delphi... thus, why the
FPC XML classes is so different than Delphi classes?
Because the FPC classes predate the Delphi classes.
They were based directly on the W3 DOM specifications.
Am 30.07.2017 08:21 schrieb "Bo Berglund" :
> 3) Change the BlockWrite command from
> BlockWrite(F, Buffer[1], Length(Buffer));
> to
> BlockWrite(F, Buffer, Length(Buffer));
>
> Note that I would like to *not* specify the index of the first element
> of the array so that the same code can work for
Am 30.07.2017 08:07 schrieb "Bo Berglund" :
>
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 16:35:05 +0200, Michael Schnell
> wrote:
>
> >On 25.07.2017 10:54, Bo Berglund wrote:
> >> so I need to write efficient replacements for certain string
functions (Delete, Insert, Copy etc).
> >Why do you think the string functio
Am 30.07.2017 09:30 schrieb "Sven Barth" :
>
> Am 30.07.2017 02:01 schrieb "Marcos Douglas B. Santos" :
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > FPC/Lazarus always tried stay compatible with Delphi... thus, why the
> > FPC XML classes is so different than Delphi classes?
Addendum: FPC's XML library probably also comes
Am 30.07.2017 02:01 schrieb "Marcos Douglas B. Santos" :
>
> Hi,
>
> FPC/Lazarus always tried stay compatible with Delphi... thus, why the
> FPC XML classes is so different than Delphi classes?
>
> Delphi XML is interface-based. There exists IXMLDocument, IXMLNode and so
on.
> FPC has just classes.
15 matches
Mail list logo