On 10/5/06, Bisma Jayadi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For example:
If this is really the case that cause you demand var_args feature, then
obviously you have problem with your software design. I agree with Marco. :) I
wrote a program to solve a problem exactly like this without need of var_args
For example:
%d/%d/%d (dd/mm/)
Hello %s(Mr). %s (Van Der Voot),
Thank you for interesting in our %s(product).
%s (Marco) we are more then happy to help you and give you additional
information about %s (product).
You can either call us at the phone number of 1234567890 extension %d
(1)
On 10/2/06, Marco van de Voort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The type of a is secure in the second part, and it is faster. Keep in mind
that more elaborate syntax increases the chance of copying/referencecount
changing etc etc.
E.g. the standard example is printf. There the first type must
On Tue, 3 Oct 2006, Marco van de Voort wrote:
But the response is not correct.
For example, I do not like the fact in VB that I must use , without
parameter if I don't' want to use this parameters.
But probably there will be a reason. Some form of disambiguation that this
comma
On 10/2/06, Daniël Mantione [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Op Mon, 2 Oct 2006, schreef ik:
Well, I think that this is also a functional thing.
* Syntactically, both methods can be safe.
* Syntactically, the FPC/Delphi one is more powerfull.
Well take a look at the way Java
On 10/3/06, Marco van de Voort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/2/06, Marco van de Voort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The type of a is secure in the second part, and it is faster. Keep in mind
that more elaborate syntax increases the chance of copying/referencecount
changing etc etc.
E.g.
On 10/3/06, Marco van de Voort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree here, but as I said (I hope), you need some sort of compiler
directive to enable such thing. By default it should accept only []. I
agree with that. And as I said before, this is a petty thing only.
Not every
Op Mon, 2 Oct 2006, schreef ik:
Hi,
I'm wondering why Pascal as a language (and FPC with it's extensions)
does not support va_args (or var_args in the java language).
It does: array of const. If you declare a procedure cdecl it is even
binary compatible with a C varargs.
Now we have
On 10/2/06, Daniël Mantione [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Op Mon, 2 Oct 2006, schreef ik:
Hi,
I'm wondering why Pascal as a language (and FPC with it's extensions)
does not support va_args (or var_args in the java language).
It does: array of const. If you declare a procedure cdecl it is even
Op Mon, 2 Oct 2006, schreef ik:
Now we have open array, that's a really cool thing, but I can't
understand why I can't have a feature such as the compiler voodoo
magic of the write procedure.
Syntactically you cannot. However, the array of const is just as
powerfull
On 10/2/06, Dani?l Mantione [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Syntactically you cannot. However, the array of const is just as powerfull
(actually more powerfull, since you can pass multiple arrays). We consider
adding a trick to make it syntactically behave like writeln unnecessary.
But in
On 10/2/06, Marco van de Voort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/2/06, Dani?l Mantione [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Syntactically you cannot. However, the array of const is just as powerfull
(actually more powerfull, since you can pass multiple arrays). We consider
adding a trick to make it
Op Mon, 2 Oct 2006, schreef ik:
2. The usage of [].
Same. Penalty for being safe. It is also required being able to mix non
array of const and normal parameters.
What is the difference ? I mean, what is the difference between
fnc(a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j);
and
fnc(a,[bcdefghij]);
?
On 10/2/06, Daniël Mantione [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Op Mon, 2 Oct 2006, schreef ik:
2. The usage of [].
Same. Penalty for being safe. It is also required being able to mix non
array of const and normal parameters.
What is the difference ? I mean, what is the difference between
On 10/2/06, Marco van de Voort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. It's not a va_args.
So? Other language, other syntax. We don't use {} either.
Sure you do, {$include file.inc} {$H+} {Comment} We just don't use it
as the C syntax wishes ...
I hope it was obvious that I meant blocks.
2.
On 10/2/06, Marco van de Voort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/2/06, Marco van de Voort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. It's not a va_args.
So? Other language, other syntax. We don't use {} either.
Sure you do, {$include file.inc} {$H+} {Comment} We just don't use it
as the C syntax wishes
Op Mon, 2 Oct 2006, schreef ik:
Well, I think that this is also a functional thing.
* Syntactically, both methods can be safe.
* Syntactically, the FPC/Delphi one is more powerfull.
Well take a look at the way Java implement it:
function varrags(String ... a)
{
17 matches
Mail list logo
