subject:"\[fpc\-pascal\] Implicit Operator Overloading"

Re: [fpc-pascal] Implicit Operator Overloading

2016-04-10 Thread Sven Barth

Am 10.04.2016 22:15 schrieb "Mazola Winstrol" : > > 2016-03-07 3:53 GMT-03:00 Sven Barth : >> >> Am 06.03.2016 22:09 schrieb "Mazola Winstrol" : >> > >> > Hello, >> > >> > Fpc: 3.0 >> > >> > Should the compiler to allow the definition of two operator overloading with the same parameters and diferen

Re: [fpc-pascal] Implicit Operator Overloading

2016-04-10 Thread Mazola Winstrol

2016-03-07 3:53 GMT-03:00 Sven Barth : > Am 06.03.2016 22:09 schrieb "Mazola Winstrol" : > > > > Hello, > > > > Fpc: 3.0 > > > > Should the compiler to allow the definition of two operator overloading > with the same parameters and diferent result types? > > > > e.g: > > > > code > > > >

Re: [fpc-pascal] Implicit Operator Overloading

2016-03-06 Thread Sven Barth

Am 06.03.2016 22:09 schrieb "Mazola Winstrol" : > > Hello, > > Fpc: 3.0 > > Should the compiler to allow the definition of two operator overloading with the same parameters and diferent result types? > > e.g: > > code > > TMyRecord record > class operator Implicit(A: TMyRecord): Re

[fpc-pascal] Implicit Operator Overloading

2016-03-06 Thread Mazola Winstrol

Hello, Fpc: 3.0 Should the compiler to allow the definition of two operator overloading with the same parameters and diferent result types? e.g: code TMyRecord record class operator Implicit(A: TMyRecord): Real; class operator Implicit(A: TMyRecord): Integer; end;