Ryan Joseph schrieb am Fr., 25. Mai 2018,
07:55:
> The procedural syntax of Insert(arr, 0, value) is less enticing than
> arr.Insert(0, value) also but again we can fix that with type helpers.
>
You are overestimating what type helpers are capable of doing for dynamic
arrays - see my remark abou
On Fri, 25 May 2018, Ryan Joseph wrote:
On May 25, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
I think the above is "right", and completely equivalent to sets, which are in
some ways
like an array: a "collection" of same typed values.
To add an element to a set you also do
MySet:=My
Ryan Joseph schrieb am Fr., 25. Mai 2018,
04:35:
>
>
> > On May 25, 2018, at 1:37 AM, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal <
> fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org> wrote:
> >
> > This is currently not supported. And to avoid backwards compatibility
> problems with existing operator overloads you'd probably need
> On May 25, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
> wrote:
>
> I think the above is "right", and completely equivalent to sets, which are in
> some ways
> like an array: a "collection" of same typed values.
>
> To add an element to a set you also do
> MySet:=MySet+[aValue];
>
> That said
On Fri, 25 May 2018, Ryan Joseph wrote:
On May 25, 2018, at 1:37 AM, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
wrote:
This is currently not supported. And to avoid backwards compatibility problems
with existing operator overloads you'd probably need to convert it to a dynamic
array first:
=== code be
> On May 25, 2018, at 1:37 AM, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> This is currently not supported. And to avoid backwards compatibility
> problems with existing operator overloads you'd probably need to convert it
> to a dynamic array first:
>
> === code begin ===
>
> a += ['foo'];
>
I just wanted to drop this trick to work around problems with record
helpers ..
If you wanted to create a record helper for a type that is not normally
allowed, or perhaps you want to have multiple record helpers for the same
type, consider defining your own separate type and make it contain said
Am 24.05.2018 um 17:27 schrieb Ryan Joseph:
On May 20, 2018, at 7:23 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
wrote:
The compiler now implements a "+" operator for arrays which is the same as if
Concat() would be called on the arrays.
I haven’t built it yet but I’m curious, does += now push an eleme
> On May 20, 2018, at 7:23 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> The compiler now implements a "+" operator for arrays which is the same as if
> Concat() would be called on the arrays.
>
I haven’t built it yet but I’m curious, does += now push an element to the
array or does this just
On Wed, 23 May 2018, Gabor Boros wrote:
Same problem with Win64. So not Linux specific.
Are these functions callbacks ? If so, is the calling convention correct ?
Michael.
Gabor
2018. 05. 22. 10:06 keltezéssel, Gabor Boros írta:
Hi All,
I need to accomplish validate XML files with an X
10 matches
Mail list logo
