Jonas Maebe wrote:
Hi,
Does anyone know what the accepted/excepted behaviour is regarding the
capture of addresses of var/out/const-by-address/constref parameters?
For example:
var
g: longint;
p: plongint;
procedure test(var l: longint);
begin
p:=@l;
end;
begin
test(g);
end.
Il 10/11/2019 14:36, Jonas Maebe ha scritto:
Hi,
Does anyone know what the accepted/excepted behaviour is regarding the
capture of addresses of var/out/const-by-address/constref parameters?
For example:
var
g: longint;
p: plongint;
procedure test(var l: longint);
begin
p:=@l;
end;
On 10/11/2019 15:05, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 10/11/2019 14:58, Martin Frb wrote:
So I am trying to understand what the difference (in terms of safety)
is? (except that the none "var param" is always unsafe, the "var param"
is only sometimes unsafe)?
If you are talking about the safety of
On 10/11/2019 14:58, Martin Frb wrote:
> So I am trying to understand what the difference (in terms of safety)
> is? (except that the none "var param" is always unsafe, the "var param"
> is only sometimes unsafe)?
If you are talking about the safety of accesses after the capturing
routine has
On 10/11/2019 14:36, Jonas Maebe wrote:
For example:
var
g: longint;
p: plongint;
procedure test(var l: longint);
begin
p:=@l;
end;
begin
test(g);
end.
After test() executes, p now contains the address of g (the '@' operator
does not return the address of g's address on the
Hi,
Does anyone know what the accepted/excepted behaviour is regarding the
capture of addresses of var/out/const-by-address/constref parameters?
For example:
var
g: longint;
p: plongint;
procedure test(var l: longint);
begin
p:=@l;
end;
begin
test(g);
end.
After test() executes, p
