On 03.07.2019 02:37, J. Gareth Moreton wrote:
On 03/07/2019 01:13, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
On 02.07.2019 23:34, Jonas Maebe wrote:
As to your patch itself: why do you not directly compare the
tconstexprint values directly, and use the svalue/uvalue fields
instead?
Because I missed that they can be directly compared directly.
I dare say, I would advise you make any new changes to my
"AS-IS-enum-04.patch", since that adds an internal error to one of the
case blocks (mostly to suppress a compiler warning) and ensures it
merges cleanly with the trunk.
Of course I would do it if I decided to work on it. But no, I won't work
on the compiler bugs/extension/anything any more. It's just a waste of time.
One reason is that I don't see any reasonable philosophy behind it. As a
result FPC is a mixture of Delphi compatibilities and incompatibilities,
applied optimizations and missing optimizations, applied extensions and
missing extensions that even contradict one another sometimes. I see FPC
as a personal project of the compiler team who has an absolute right of
taking decisions about it. So I just accept it as-is.
The second reason is that the compiler people are very busy (which I
perfectly understand) and it's hard to get some feedback even when
fixing bugs.
On the other hand it's not that bad all in all. FPC still is a good
compiler and I prefer it over Delphi. And I have the source code of it,
so if it really matters, I can patch it for myself.
Ondrej
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
