> On Nov 4, 2023, at 4:22 PM, Sven Barth <pascaldra...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Then don't assign them every "frame". If you just keep them around then they > aren't more expensive than a virtual method call. > And any other mechanism would involve the heap as well, because that's how > anonymous functions that capture variables work and thus anything that wants > to store them must play by the same rules. There won't be any changes there. >
The need for a universal function pointer type really isn't about the function references even though they work for that, albeit with unneeded overhead. Lets say you have a sort function which takes a compare callback parameter. You can make the callback type "is nested" which works on global and nested/anonymous functions but not methods. What if the user wants to provide the compare function as a method because they're calling it in a class which shares the code elsewhere? As the writer of the function you'd need to make 2 versions of the function, one "is nested" and "of object". The writer of the sort function shouldn't need to know what kind of function it will be passed, just that a comparison callback is provided, right? Regards, Ryan Joseph _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
