[fpc-devel] Proof of Concept ARC implementation

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Mon, 27 Oct 2014, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, 27 Oct 2014, Kostas Michalopoulos wrote:
>
>> 
>> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Michael Schnell <mschnell at lumino.de> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>       So you suggest cyclic references should be forbidden (erroneous 
>> programming technique). Are they ?
>> 
>> 
>> IMO if a program takes care to avoid cyclic references (with a heaptrc-like 
>> unit to find such cases), it shouldn't pay for the overhead that a detector 
>> would have. Of course i'd
>> make that a compiler directive (or some global flag) since others may not 
>> care.
>> 
>> @Sven:
>> TBH i don't feel that strongly (heh) about the syntax. It just looks weird 
>> to me compared to other keyword usage in Free Pascal. If at least there was 
>> a semicolon after the type
>> it may look more consistent (after all, cdecl, extern, etc are placed after 
>> a semicolon). F.e.
>> 
>> Foo: TFoo; weak;
>> 
>> But that probably wont work well with function arguments. After all there 
>> aren't "cdecl", "extern", "static", etc function arguments.
>> 
>> Is there any other such use of a keyword? I think it is a bad idea to 
>> introduce a new keyword placement if there isn't already one since it 
>> breaks consistency (all those other
>> keywords are placed in front of the type name whereas this special one is 
>> placed after).
>
> as far as I can see, the proposal of Sven is perfectly in line with existing 
> constructs and does not break consistency.
>
> var
>  a : something deprecated ; cdecl; external 'x';
>
> Fields in classes:
>
>  aa : integer implementation; static;

That should have been
   aa : integer unimplemented; static;

Anyway, see e.g.
http://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/ref/refse5.html#x17-160001.5

So Sven is not deviating from existing practices.

Michael.