In our previous episode, Anthony Walter said:
> "Technical limitations aside, at this point what would be needed from the
> community to get the generic syntax changed?:
>
> : Patches.
>
> I believe there would first need to be some sort ofg consensus within the
> community about the changing the
Question: who wants to add it?
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 10:18 PM, Anthony Walter wrote:
>> I believe there would first need to be some sort ofg consensus within the
>> community about the changing the syntax.
>
> If both syntaxes are supported I don't thi
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 10:18 PM, Anthony Walter wrote:
> I believe there would first need to be some sort ofg consensus within the
> community about the changing the syntax.
If both syntaxes are supported I don't think many people will be against it.
--
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
"Technical limitations aside, at this point what would be needed from the
community to get the generic syntax changed?:
: Patches.
I believe there would first need to be some sort ofg consensus within the
community about the changing the syntax.
___
fpc
In our previous episode, Anthony Walter said:
> Technical limitations aside, at this point what would be needed from the
> community to get the generic syntax changed?
Patches.
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.fre
Anthony Walter schrieb:
> Graeme:
>
> "To be honest, this is a slightly unfair case, saying Free Pascal must
> become Delphi compatible, when Free Pascal had generics support
> *before* Delphi did. Maybe Delphi should become more Free Pascal
> compatible."
>
> I've preemptively disabled this argu
Graeme:
"To be honest, this is a slightly unfair case, saying Free Pascal must
become Delphi compatible, when Free Pascal had generics support
*before* Delphi did. Maybe Delphi should become more Free Pascal
compatible."
I've preemptively disabled this argument so many times in the past. It's
bec
On 27 April 2010 20:14, Anthony Walter wrote:
>
> 1) type generic TList = class // ... as is now, the word generic is
> redundant
>
> 2) type TList = class // ... better and in line with Delphi
To be honest, this is a slightly unfair case, saying Free Pascal must
become Delphi compatible, when Fr
Anthony Walter schrieb:
> Technical limitations aside, at this point what would be needed from the
> community to get the generic syntax changed?
1) Delphi mode only
2) not breaking old code i.e. accepting both variants
3) more Delphi generic compatibility
> Supposing I had the soruce
> code cha
Technical limitations aside, at this point what would be needed from the
community to get the generic syntax changed? Supposing I had the soruce code
changes to accommodate the change to remove the "generic" keyword, what
would be needed from the community to approve moving that change into the
lan
Anthony Walter schrieb:
> When I google search for "FPC generics" tohe top result links here:
>
> http://wiki.freepascal.org/Generics
>
> Two cases:
>
> 1) type generic TList = class // ... as is now, the word generic is
> redundant
>
> 2) type TList = class // ... better and in line with Delph
When I google search for "FPC generics" tohe top result links here:
http://wiki.freepascal.org/Generics
Two cases:
1) type generic TList = class // ... as is now, the word generic is
redundant
2) type TList = class // ... better and in line with Delphi
It seems both were on the suggested list.
Anthony Walter schrieb:
> I was on freenode irc #fpc earlier and asked some questions but not
> enough people were online to get an answer.
>
> My question was/is:
>
> Will there ever again come a point where FPC attempts to bring in
> more compatibility with Delphi?
Nobody can predict if
I was on freenode irc #fpc earlier and asked some questions but not enough
people were online to get an answer.
My question was/is:
Will there ever again come a point where FPC attempts to bring in more
compatibility with Delphi? Specifically, in regards to operator overloading
and generic l
14 matches
Mail list logo
