Re: [fpc-devel] C-block reference syntax (blocker for 3.2)

2019-12-14 Thread Ryan Joseph via fpc-devel
> On Dec 14, 2019, at 12:18 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-devel > wrote: > > In r43684 the syntax was now adjusted, so that an additional "cblock" > directive is required (in addition to the calling convention which for macOS > can be cdecl or mwpascal). can you please post an example snippet of

Re: [fpc-devel] C-block reference syntax (blocker for 3.2)

2019-12-12 Thread Ryan Joseph via fpc-devel
> On Dec 12, 2019, at 11:13 AM, Martin Frb wrote: > > I brought an example, where actually the "drop [] for last param" would break > code. > Therefore it no longer matters if it is or is not against good design. > Dropping the [], (in the new case, for last param) will break code that >

Re: [fpc-devel] C-block reference syntax (blocker for 3.2)

2019-12-11 Thread Ryan Joseph via fpc-devel
> On Dec 11, 2019, at 4:16 PM, Michael Van Canneyt > wrote: > > It does gain something: it tells you it is NOT a varargs, but an array of > const, which is a different beast altogether. But it's a syntax equivalent for "a variable amount of arguments", i.e. varargs. ;) I guess others don't

Re: [fpc-devel] C-block reference syntax (blocker for 3.2)

2019-12-11 Thread Ryan Joseph via fpc-devel
> On Dec 10, 2019, at 5:14 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-devel > wrote: > > From the view of the *caller* you are mostly right. Though the square > brackets can't be left away, cause we're talking about an array parameter > here. If it would be allowed for array of const then it would also need to

Re: [fpc-devel] C-block reference syntax (blocker for 3.2)

2019-12-10 Thread Ryan Joseph via fpc-devel
> On Dec 10, 2019, at 11:38 AM, Sven Barth via fpc-devel > wrote: > > First of Object Pascal supports "array of const" which is safer due to a > added type field for each entry. > From the users standpoint only real difference is the [] syntax and if the array of const is the last (or

Re: [fpc-devel] C-block reference syntax (blocker for 3.2)

2019-12-08 Thread Ryan Joseph via fpc-devel
> On Dec 8, 2019, at 2:30 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-devel > wrote: > > And no, your patch WILL NOT allow that. We've consciously decided AGAINST > implementing varargs functions in Pascal (see > https://wiki.freepascal.org/User_Changes_2.6.0#Array_of_const_parameters_and_cdecl_routines > )

Re: [fpc-devel] Memory leak @ tobjectdef.getcopy

2019-12-01 Thread Ryan Joseph via fpc-devel
Blaise how are the closures coming? I think you have enough done you could submit it into trunk so we can start testing. Please if you can get to this we have people willing to help. It's been some 6 months now since I offered to help and it's still in limbo. Sorry to pester you but we're

<    1   2