[fpc-devel] new features and facilities

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015, Sven Barth wrote:

> Am 10.10.2015 10:51 schrieb "Mark Morgan Lloyd" <
> markMLl.fpc-devel at telemetry.co.uk>:
>>
>> Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 9 Oct 2015, Sven Barth wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure this kind of semantics is possible with a compiler
>>>>
>>>> intrinsic...
>>>>>
>>>>> But if it is: In that case the IfThen or IIF() or somesuch has my
>>>>
>>>> absolute top preference, followed by ternary. (and the If .. then
>>>> expression should be blasted to hell ;) )
>>>>
>>>> Yes a compiler intrinsic could handle that. In the end all three
> syntaxes
>>>> are the same code representation anyway: namely an if-node.
>>>> The IfThen() intrinsic would be fine with me as well. Let's call this
> our
>>>> common ground ;)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Agreed !
>>
>>
>> It would be even better if it could be generalised to evaluate and return
> one of any number of expressions.
>
> How do you think that could look like? IfThen() is the wrong intrinsic for
> this and for a CaseOf() intrinsic you'd nevertheless need the case labels.
> And /then/ I agree with Ralf that it isn't understandable...

I had the same thought. The only case I see applicable is an ordinal.
CaseOf(a, ord(a)=0, ord(a)=1, ord(a)=2...)
Still it seems somewhat convoluted.

Michael.