I’ve looked into this more today and I don’t see how we can get around needing
a typesym for specializations.
For example:
generic procedure DoThis<T>(msg: T);
begin
end;
var
a: array of char;
begin
DoThis(a);
Is going to specialize as DoThis<array of char>(a). “array of char” is (for
lack of the proper term) an anonymous dynamic array and would be not a valid
specialization unless an explicit type was declared.
For strings I figured out I could use the built-in system type
“cshortstringtype” if is_chararray() return true (for specializing string
constants like in my initial question) but that is specific to string constants.
For normal function calls this isn’t a problem because the type is always
specified but for implicit specializations the type may need to be declared in
order for the specialization to be possible.
Regards,
Ryan Joseph
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
