[fpc-pascal] Call for testing: array constructors
Sven Barth
pascaldragon at googlemail.com
Mon May 8 17:34:32 CEST 2017
Am 08.05.2017 16:34 schrieb "Mark Morgan Lloyd" <
markMLl.fpc-pascal at telemetry.co.uk>:
>
> On 04/05/17 22:30, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal wrote:
>>
>> Hello together!
>> Since revision 36105 FPC now supports the use of array constructorsusing
the "[...]" syntax inside ordinary code blocks like Delphi doessince - I
think - XE8. And yes, even nested ones are supported (take alook at
$fpcdir/tests/test/tarrconstr5.pp for a bit of inspiration).
>> Considering that this changed how "[...]" is handled I'd like you all
totest whether your existing code still works (especially if it's
dealingwith sets!) and to try this new feature to see if there are any
problemsthat our testsuite doesn't cover yet.
>>
>> If you report bugs, then please attach the tag "array constructors".
>
>
> > Operators however would need you to stuff them into a record as only
> > then you could define generic operators that would work on that
> > record type. Alse the code of your addition operators differs with
> > the types so that would not help, at least not as is.
>
> Thanks Sven. Am I correct in believing that operators are basically not
handled by generics?
They are handled in so far that operator overloads in records are respected
as well if the operator was available at the time the generic was
*declared* (cause that scope will be used at specialization time). I have
plans to test a change in this, but I don't know yet whether it should make
it into trunk...
> Apart from that, the operations of getting stuff into arrays etc. appear
to work well.
Good to know. Any regressions with ordinary sets?
Regards,
Sven
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freepascal.org/pipermail/fpc-pascal/attachments/20170508/8fae4451/attachment.html>
More information about the fpc-pascal
mailing list