Am 19.08.2018 um 14:55 schrieb Florian Klämpfl:
> Please note again: in general, there are no defined rules for FPC as soon as
> range check errors would occur. For FPC,
> you are just documenting random *behavior* which might change even with the
> next minor release.
I know. And I have given
In our previous episode, Martok said:
> Am 18.08.2018 um 23:25 schrieb Marco van de Voort:
> > Summary: behaviour with range checks off is implementation defined?
> No. "implementation different", but not really "implementation defined".
> TP and Delphi are fully defined without range checks. In
Am 19.08.2018 um 15:08 schrieb Martok:
But I don't actually want to debate that here, just collect information for
users.
Well, you have to as you give people the wrong impression that they can control what happens if they suppress/ignore run
time errors.
_
Am 18.08.2018 um 23:25 schrieb Marco van de Voort:
> Summary: behaviour with range checks off is implementation defined?
No. "implementation different", but not really "implementation defined".
TP and Delphi are fully defined without range checks. In fact, TP is defined as
*having no runtime range
Am 19.08.2018 um 14:44 schrieb Martok:
as soon as [something changes], Delphi shows exactly the same behavior as FPC.
But that's kind of the point of this collection: sometimes the rules intersect,
but for most cases, they don't.
Please note again: in general, there are no defined rules for F
Am 19.08.2018 um 10:08 schrieb Florian Klämpfl:
> Not really, you have also to fix the comments below because as soon as the
> range is 0..127 and the test is against 127,
> Delphi shows exactly the same behavior as FPC.
Not really. You don't have to change the range, there is a warning emitted f
On 18/08/18 23:18, Maciej Izak wrote:
on SCOPEDINTERFACEDESTROY)... FPC core team said that this behavior of
Delphi is not documented and not COM compatible (or is undefined in COM
- I don't remember). Also there is some mystery example for large
methods when Delphi is able to break the rule an
Ryan Joseph schrieb am Sa., 18. Aug. 2018,
19:38:
>
>
> > On Aug 17, 2018, at 7:19 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal <
> fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org> wrote:
> >
> > However for classes there is the problem of temporary variables. Take a
> := b + c + d. That is essentially compiled as t := b + c;
Am 19.08.2018 um 01:49 schrieb Martok:
Am 18.08.2018 um 23:39 schrieb Florian Klämpfl:
This is plainly wrong, at least for the older delphis, the host type in delphi
will be Byte (or even Shortint).
It is actually shortint ...
Correct, I was thinking of the default PackEnum. Which of course
2018-08-18 20:26 GMT+02:00 Marcos Douglas B. Santos :
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 2:04 PM, Ryan Joseph
> wrote:
> >
> > How does TAutoFree in mORMot work? Never heard of this.
>
> See http://blog.synopse.info/post/2014/11/14/Automatic-
> TSQLRecord-memory-handling
worth to note that in FPC you ad
10 matches
Mail list logo
