Hi,

Can I, using FPC trunk, do this sintaxe?

type
  TMemoryManager = class(TInterfacedObject, IMalloc, IErrorInfo)
     function IMalloc.Alloc = Allocate;
     procedure IMalloc.Free = Deallocate;
    ...
end;

I'm using 2.6.1 and do not works.

From Dephi's (7) help:

----------------------------------
"You can override the default name-based mappings by including method resolution clauses in a class declaration. When a class implements two or more interfaces that have identically named methods, use method resolution clauses to resolve the naming conflicts.

A method resolution clause has the form

procedure interface.interfaceMethod = implementingMethod;

or

function interface.interfaceMethod = implementingMethod;

where implementingMethod is a method declared in the class or one of its ancestors. The implementingMethod can be a method declared later in the class declaration, but cannot be a private method of an ancestor class declared in another module.

For example, the class declaration

type
  TMemoryManager = class(TInterfacedObject, IMalloc, IErrorInfo)
function IMalloc.Alloc = Allocate;
procedure IMalloc.Free = Deallocate;
    ...
end;

maps IMalloc's Alloc and Free methods onto TMemoryManager's Allocate and Deallocate methods.

A method resolution clause cannot alter a mapping introduced by an ancestor class."

Thanks,

Marcos Douglas

In our previous episode, Marcos Douglas said:

No. See bug #21064.

p.s. In a case like this searching for "interface" in mantis and clicking a few reports there, will work faster :-)

30.04.2012 19:06, Marcos Douglas пишет:

To my knowledge, this kind of stuff should work.
What exact problem are you experiencing?

Sergei

Thanks.

p.s. In a case like this searching for "interface" in mantis and clicking a few reports there, will work faster :-)

You propose me to search for a bug instead of a solution? :) Forget, I understood.

Marcos Douglas

p.s: Do you think that my work was stoped because the FPC do not have this feature?

Simple. Does not compile.

Marcos Douglas

30.04.2012 20:38, Marcos Douglas пишет:

Simple. Does not compile.

The following compiles successfully (in Win32):

---------------------------------------------- cut
{$mode objfpc}{$h+}
uses activex;
type
   TMemoryManager = class(TInterfacedObject, IMalloc)
      function IMalloc.Alloc = Allocate;
      procedure IMalloc.Free = Deallocate;
      function IMalloc.Realloc = Reallocate;
      function IMalloc.GetSize = get_size;
      function IMalloc.DidAlloc = did_alloc;
      procedure IMalloc.HeapMinimize = heap_minimize;
      function allocate(sz: longword): pointer; stdcall;
      procedure deallocate(p: pointer); stdcall;
      function reallocate(p: pointer; sz: longword): pointer; stdcall;
      function get_size(p: pointer): longword; stdcall;
      function did_alloc(p: pointer): longint; stdcall;
      procedure heap_minimize; stdcall;
   end;
function TMemoryManager.allocate(sz: longword): pointer; stdcall;
begin
end;
procedure TMemoryManager.deallocate(p: pointer); stdcall;
begin
end;
function TMemoryManager.reallocate(p: pointer; sz: longword): pointer; stdcall;
begin
end;
function TMemoryManager.get_size(p: pointer): longword; stdcall;
begin
end;
function TMemoryManager.did_alloc(p: pointer): longint; stdcall;
begin
end;
procedure TMemoryManager.heap_minimize; stdcall;
begin
end;
begin
end.
------------------------------------------- cut

Sergei

FPC 2.6.1 or 2.7.1 (trunk)?
I'm using 2.6.1 and I can't compile it.

Marcos Douglas

30.04.2012 22:42, Marcos Douglas пишет:

FPC 2.6.1 or 2.7.1 (trunk)? I'm using 2.6.1 and I can't compile it.

I was testing with trunk, but I don't remember significant changes to this part of compiler after 2.6.0. What error do you get?

Sergei

You're right, sorry.
See:

Ex:
  ImyInterface = interface
    procedure Foo;
  end;
 TmyClass = class(TInterfacedObject, ImyInterface)
 public
   procedure ImyInterface.Foo = myFoo;
   procedure myFoo;  << this line was missing
 end;

I thought it was not necessary.
Thank you.

Marcos Douglas

In our previous episode, Marco van de Voort said:

> end; No. See bug #21064.

This involves generics, so is something different.

Yeah, I saw... This confused the two of us.
Thanks anyway.

Marcos Douglas