Flávio Etrusco schrieb:
I don't understand "anonymous", "call through", and the example :-(
anoymous -> "inherited" instead of "inherited SomeCall(AParam: Type);"
Okay, that makes sense.
call through -> well, I'm no native English speaker either, and I also
found "through" isn't an appropriate word. IMVHO it's the new behavior
that calls "through" the parent into the exact overriden method ;-)
Makes sense, too.
The example is clear for me. Anonymous 'inherited' will call an exact
inherited implementation instead of a compatible overload in the
parent/intermediate ancestors. I wasn't really aware of the
old/current-release FPC behavior :-o
IMO a compiler should reject ambigous overloaded procedures, i.e. when the
significant parameters only differ in type size.
It doesn't reject the overloads?
How else would the example compile?
test(b: byte) is not really distinguishable from test(b: longint).
DoDi
--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
