[fpc-devel] Typed addresses, revisited

[Micha Nelissen]

Jonas Maebe wrote:
> That's true. I did not look at the code changes in the compiler, only at
> the log message:
> 
>   add warning for arithmetic on untyped pointers
> 
> As far as I can see, what's been done is actually:
> 
>   add warning for arithmetic on non-typecasted @-expressions

My reasoning was that a typecasted pointer is always a typed pointer,
since you have given it a type explicitly.

> I don't have a problem with that. One thing which still should be
> changed about the patch is that nf_typedaddr should also be included for
> nf_internal type conversions (and the code style should conform to the

Yes, was not sure about when implicit type conversions are done and
whether it would be appropriate to 'tag' them with typedaddr flag.

> one used in the rest of the modified units, i.e. "end" and "else" should
> be on a different line).

The indenting is by no means consistent anyway :P. But I'll try to keep
it in mind for the future.

Micha