> On Dec 1, 2021, at 4:56 AM, Sven Barth wrote:
>
> If you don't allow to skip parameters then this feature can be considered
> absolutely useless. Who would voluntarily write more when many users already
> cry about Pascal being so verbose?
I thought the option of improved readability made
Am 28.11.2021 um 14:21 schrieb Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal:
On Nov 28, 2021, at 7:01 PM, Sven Barth wrote:
Anything that relates to picking functions *must* be part of the overload
handling. You can easily see this with your named argument proposal when not
all arguments are named (and then
Am 28.11.2021 um 12:52 schrieb Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal:
On Nov 28, 2021, at 4:18 PM, Mattias Gaertner via fpc-pascal
wrote:
What do you mean? Is there already some call by arg names in some mode(switch)?
I mean all the plumbing is there so the feature could easily be extended from
IDisp
> On Nov 28, 2021, at 7:01 PM, Sven Barth wrote:
>
> Anything that relates to picking functions *must* be part of the overload
> handling. You can easily see this with your named argument proposal when not
> all arguments are named (and then the compiler also needs to check that
> unnamed pa
Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal schrieb am
So., 28. Nov. 2021, 03:12:
>
>
> > On Nov 27, 2021, at 5:00 PM, Sven Barth
> wrote:
> >
> > The compiler does not know which routine is called upon parsing the
> parameter declarations (which would mean that error reports would need to
> be deferred until th
Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal schrieb am
So., 28. Nov. 2021, 05:32:
>
>
> > On Nov 27, 2021, at 5:03 PM, Sven Barth
> wrote:
> >
> > candidates:=tcallcandidates.create(sym:=symtableprocentry,
> st:=symtableproc,ppn:=left,
> ignorevisibility:=ignorevisibility,allowdefaultparas:=not(nf_isproperty in
> On Nov 28, 2021, at 4:18 PM, Mattias Gaertner via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> What do you mean? Is there already some call by arg names in some
> mode(switch)?
I mean all the plumbing is there so the feature could easily be extended from
IDispatch to work with normal function calls.
Regards,
On 28/11/2021 10:18, Mattias Gaertner via fpc-pascal wrote:
On 26.11.21 04:10, Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal wrote:
[...]The majority of the infrastructure is already there so it needs
to merely be extended.
What do you mean? Is there already some call by arg names in some
mode(switch)?
No, it
On 26.11.21 04:10, Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal wrote:
[...]The majority of the infrastructure is already there so it needs to merely
be extended.
What do you mean? Is there already some call by arg names in some
mode(switch)?
Mattias
___
fpc-pascal
> On Nov 27, 2021, at 5:03 PM, Sven Barth wrote:
>
> candidates:=tcallcandidates.create(sym:=symtableprocentry,
> st:=symtableproc,ppn:=left,
> ignorevisibility:=ignorevisibility,allowdefaultparas:=not(nf_isproperty in
> flags),objcidcall:=cnf_objc_id_call in
> callnodeflags,explicitunit:=c
> On Nov 27, 2021, at 5:00 PM, Sven Barth wrote:
>
> The compiler does not know which routine is called upon parsing the parameter
> declarations (which would mean that error reports would need to be deferred
> until the lookup of the routine failed).
My idea was to not actually have it affe
On 27/11/2021 03:32, Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal wrote:
1) Original form (the compiler doesn't use spaces between punctuation). Very
difficult to read if nothing else because the lack of spaces but it's also not
clear at all which params are which. Even code tools are going to not help very
muc
Am 27.11.2021 um 03:32 schrieb Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal:
On Nov 26, 2021, at 4:20 PM, Ryan Joseph wrote:
It's mainly useful when reading code so you don't need to review the function
definition, using code tools or any other method. I've been enjoying it in
other languages when it's not c
Am 26.11.2021 um 05:10 schrieb Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal:
This was discussed before some years ago with no conclusion
(https://www.mail-archive.com/fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org/msg46280.html)
but I'd like to bring it up again. Can we consider extending the variant
dispatch call named param
> On Nov 26, 2021, at 4:20 PM, Ryan Joseph wrote:
>
> It's mainly useful when reading code so you don't need to review the function
> definition, using code tools or any other method. I've been enjoying it in
> other languages when it's not compulsory and FPC already supports the syntax
> so
> On Nov 26, 2021, at 3:31 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
> wrote:
>
> That seems like a fake argument: Of course you need to look, because you need
> the names ?
> Secondly, the IDE will simply tell you what the names are when the cursor is
> on them.
It's mainly useful when reading code so you do
On Fri, 26 Nov 2021, Ryan Joseph via fpc-pascal wrote:
This was discussed before some years ago with no conclusion
(https://www.mail-archive.com/fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org/msg46280.html)
but I'd like to bring it up again. Can we consider extending the variant
dispatch call named parame
This was discussed before some years ago with no conclusion
(https://www.mail-archive.com/fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org/msg46280.html)
but I'd like to bring it up again. Can we consider extending the variant
dispatch call named parameters to normal functions? The majority of the
infrastructur
18 matches
Mail list logo
