Re: [fpc-devel] Proof of Concept ARC implementation

2014-10-26 Thread Sven Barth
Am 26.10.2014 02:10 schrieb Kostas Michalopoulos badsectorac...@gmail.com : My only comment will be about the placement of weak... wouldn't make more sense to put it in front of the type (ie weak TTest instead of TTest weak), similar to how other stuff like const, var, specialize, etc work? It

Re: [fpc-devel] Proof of Concept ARC implementation

2014-10-26 Thread Hans-Peter Diettrich
Sven Barth schrieb: Am 25.10.2014 03:17 schrieb Hans-Peter Diettrich drdiettri...@aol.com mailto:drdiettri...@aol.com: - a class instance is destroyed once the reference count reaches zero (and Free does not work for them) Shouldn't Free be usable as a finalizer, clearing all

Re: [fpc-devel] Proof of Concept ARC implementation

2014-10-26 Thread Sven Barth
On 26.10.2014 10:44, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: A further problem might be legacy code which gets passed a reference counted instance (on which ARCIncRef was called to keep it alive) and which then calls Free. Might not be the intended result by neither code... This might be the reason of

Re: [fpc-devel] Proof of Concept ARC implementation

2014-10-26 Thread Kostas Michalopoulos
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Sven Barth pascaldra...@googlemail.com wrote: Definitely not. We are in Pascal and there such directives are placed afterwards. But there are tons of left-sided keywords, like specialize, const, pointer, array, file, var, out, etc. And as i said, weak Foo reads

Re: [fpc-devel] Proof of Concept ARC implementation

2014-10-26 Thread Sven Barth
On 26.10.2014 12:17, Kostas Michalopoulos wrote: On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Sven Barth pascaldra...@googlemail.com mailto:pascaldra...@googlemail.com wrote: Definitely not. We are in Pascal and there such directives are placed afterwards. But there are tons of left-sided