And I just noticed that I sent this to fpc-devel instead of fpc-pascal... *sigh*

So here it is again for fpc-pascal as well.

Regards,
Sven

2016-02-01 21:16 GMT+01:00 Sven Barth :

On 01.02.2016 21:14, Sven Barth wrote: > Time for the next flame.

Flame? :O It was constructive discussion :)

For me

x := if true then 0 else 1

is ideal and compatible with Oxygene. +1 IMO no need to any other combination.

Maybe is time to start developing {$MODE OXYGENE} ?

+1. It was constructive discussion.

For me

x := if true then 0 else 1

For me, no problem extending ObjFPC to make a new abbreviated Pascal language, however, will be IfThen() function kept? (or something like this)

Maciej Izak wrote

x := if true then 0 else 1

Here a keyword and a statement just optionally returns a value, Same is ignored in all legacy code but can be use it you want to and do know what you do.

Additionally "0" now is a statement, (optionally) extending what is considered a statement.

This is a rather drastic change in the basic definition of the language, but might be doable. I's completely optional, and I don't see how it might break anything.

But of course the paradigm would ask for being extended to many or all other keywords.

An obvious example is "case".

-Michael

Why would "0" now be a statement? As long as the "if" is the expression as well then the definition would be "if Condition then ThenExpr else ElseExpr", not "if Condition then ThenStmt else ElseStmt". Otherwise things like procedures ore assignments would be allowed as well which is not the case.

This is a rather drastic change in the basic definition of the language, but might be doable. I's completely optional, and I don't see how it might break anything.

Of course it's doable. See the patch I attached at the initial mail of this thread.

Regards,
Sven

So (Sven) to clarify, assume that your original ifthen [patch is now in latest svn compiler although more work will needed to do x:=if a then b else c;? j

John Lee wrote

So (Sven) to clarify, assume that your original ifthen [patch is now in latest svn compiler although more work will needed to do x:=if a then b else c;? j

The IfThen() is in trunk though it will at least be renamed. The if-then-else expression would in theory be good to go as well. Just look at the first message of this thread for the patch to play around with it.

Regards,
Sven

I probably missed it, but what problem is "IfThen()" actually solving?

g.

Based on Florian's recent emails the if then else is ok, so guess we should be close to getting it all running. Great, thanks for your efforts. j

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 4:07 PM, geneb wrote:

I probably missed it, but what problem is "IfThen()" actually solving?

It's a sugar syntax, for

if cond then
  x:= a
else
  x:=b;

Just follow this thread:
http://lists.freepascal.org/pipermail/fpc-pascal/2016-January/046375.html

Pro #1: shortness of script
Pro #2: easier porting of C-style code (with ternary ? operator. Pascal doesn't have an equivalent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%3F:#Programming_languages_without_the_conditional_operator )

thanks,
Dmitry

So it's not solving a /problem/ it's lessening an inconvienence(sp!).

I would've gone with IIf(). :)

g.

geneb wrote

So it's not solving a /problem/ it's lessening an inconvienence(sp!). I would've gone with IIf(). :)

Just keep in mind that the thread (about preferences) is closed. Everyone are welcomed to create poll on the forum. Discussion also goes on at fpc-other list.

thanks,
Dmitry

You can't "close" a discussion thread on an email list. :)

Everyone are welcomed to create poll on the forum. Discussion also goes on at fpc-other list.

I don't have a dog in the fight, I was just making an observation.

g.

Yes, you can, because mails towards the list can be set to be moderated based on different criteria and I bet that the thread ID is one of them. Jonas (as list admin) probably did just that.

Regards,
Sven

Sven Barth wrote

Yes, you can, because mails towards the list can be set to be moderated based on different criteria and I bet that the thread ID is one of them. Jonas (as list admin) probably did just that.

Mailman (at least version 2.1.20, which is what I run) doesn't work like that.

g.

The problem with Iff() is:
1) it either retains normal function behavior and thus has to evaluate both expressions (i.e. suboptimal performance and allowing side effects);
2) or add inconsistency by using function syntax but different behavior.

Best regards,
Flávio

etrusco wrote

Well:
program Project1;  function test1: integer;  begin    WriteLn('A');
Result := 10;  end;  function test2: integer;  begin    WriteLn('B');
Result := 20;  end;  function CommonFunc(A: Boolean; B, C: integer):
integer;  begin    if A then      Result := B    else      Result := C;
end;var  X: LongInt;begin  X := IfThen(True, test1, test2);  WriteLn(X);
WriteLn('----');  X := CommonFunc(True, test1, test2);  WriteLn(X);
ReadLn;end.
Result:
A10----BA10