In our previous episode, Hans-Peter Diettrich said: > > > A more grave reason though is that Delphi does not have low() and high() on > > sets and a request to add it by me in 2006 was closed with their equivalent > > of "won't fix". > > I wonder how FPC defines low() and high() for sets.
See the source. > The static bounds > can be obtained from the underlying enumerated or subrange type, even in > Delphi. If defined separately. > So it would only make a difference, when FPC sets would track > the actual (dynamic) first and last element in an set, with special > handling for empty sets where both low() and high() cannot return valid > values. No, it just handles the values from the basetype (range or enum), they are still compiletime expressions. The main use is that this means that you don't have to recompile a library if sb was foolish enough to define a set of an anonymous type. _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
