On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 2:17 PM Sven Barth via fpc-devel
wrote:
>> I'll write a simple example in the wiki (there's a ToDo for that
>> currently).
> Please do.
Done.
It's a bit more elaborate than just a few lines though.
--
Bart
___
fpc-devel
On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 2:17 PM Sven Barth via fpc-devel
wrote:
> Management operators are already part of 3.2.x (
> https://wiki.freepascal.org/FPC_New_Features_3.2.0#Management_operators_for_record_types
> ). Or did I misunderstand your remark? 樂
I misread the wiki page (it mentions 3.1.1
Bart via fpc-devel schrieb am Do., 25.
Apr. 2024, 11:48:
>
> > Then declare a Copy management operator in the record. Unlike an
> assignment operator these *must* be part of the record, thus the same rules
> are applied for the same type everywhere unlike for operator overloads. See
> also
On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 11:18 AM Sven Barth via fpc-devel
wrote:
> If there exists a built-in operator then overloading that operator is
> forbidden to avoid confusion when what operator might be used (operators can
> after all be declared *anywhere* and thus they might sometimes be used and
Bart via fpc-devel schrieb am Mi., 24.
Apr. 2024, 11:59:
> Overloading the := (assignment) operator for equal types is forbidden.
> Out of curiosity I would like to know why that is?
>
If there exists a built-in operator then overloading that operator is
forbidden to avoid confusion when what
> On Apr 24, 2024, at 4:59 PM, Bart via fpc-devel
> wrote:
>
> In such instances it would really be helpfull if you could just
> overload the assignment operator like:
> operator := (Src: TRec): TRec;
> begin
> Result := AssignRec(Src);
> end;
I agree this seems reasonable but maybe the
Hi,
Overloading the := (assignment) operator for equal types is forbidden.
Out of curiosity I would like to know why that is?
When you have e.g. a record definition containing a dynamic array, not
being able to overload the assignment operator is just a PITA.
OK, once you know why the
