fxm wrote:#attach# / #detach# ?

nice one! I like the combination, one for putting it together and the other one for putting it apart. Let´s see, what Jeff says about all of it.

I admit i´m not to 100% happy with "#split#" myself, but what else would be short and "telling" enough: cut, break, divide, token(ize) ?

@fxm, shame on me, it must be "print x" (typo ..., not my day today it seems) @MrSwiss, i agree, if it were a generic string processing function. In this case it is a preprocessor operator for a specific purpose. The purpose of it is to do the opposite of #join#. We can discuss the naming ...

@fxm, i was talking of the source parameter, but anyway - yes - you are right , current fbc 1.08 declares destination and source parameter BYREF for POKE ANY, which is not, what i intended. Running tests with my original PR and what has been merged to master, there are differences (Please note that ...

Regarding "POKE ANY" i asked for adding POKE ANY in order to have a high level syntax for filling a block of memory of arbitrary length. POKE ANY seems a natural choice, because POKE already stands for filling memory and "ANY" stands for something undefined. So POKE ANY does not ...

Jeff, i closed PR #191 in favour of PR #211, which takes a more generic approach as requested. This set of new pp operators makes a lot of new things possible and it is expandable. - #ucase#: "stringize uppercase" which makes case insensitive comparisons (#if #ucase#p = "ABC") in...

Jeff, With this set of operators, you can do almost everything i can think of. #REDEF could be dropped. Should i try to code this, or would you like to proceed as outlined in your last post? Referring to post #8 and #9, what should i do? In the meantime i have running code for a pp syntax like this:...

Jeff, as already mentioned i usually try to keep the necessary changes as minimal as possible, but you suggested a more generic approach. It´s amazimg what you can do by combining and nesting macros and the already available macro operators including ("#" and "##" type of operato...

Hi Jeff, thanks for taking care of PR206! I feel like you have invented a syntax for your array feature and then very narrowly solved for your needs Yes, i only added, what was necessary to get my code working. I expanded on, what was already there trying to following the existing naming. "Arra...

Well, i just wanted to talk with you in private - nothing super important, nothing super special, nothing illegal ;-). This forum doesn´t offer private messages and i don´t have your mail address ...

JK

Happy new year everyone! @Jeff i don´t ask for new standards here, i´m asking for making new things possible. Accepting my proposed compiler changes (#PR 191) mostly adds new pp operators, which makes a macro driven syntax possible (as disussed here: https://www.freebasic.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1...

Hi D.J.Peters,

would you please drop me a mail at <jk-ide at t minus online dot de>. It´s about an audio project and fbsound. Thanks,


JK

Jeff, my priority would be #191 first, #195 second, #189 last. I need #191 for further development in general, #195 covers one aspect for string extensions, which must be solved sooner or later but can still wait a bit. #189 tries to fix an existing bug, but as there is a workaround, can wait too. I...

@angros47,

... just to be sure, did you receive my mail?


JK

Thanks, explains this topic comprehensive and exhaustive. Maybe you should print the memory addresses (@array descriptor, pd->index_ptr and pd->base_ptr) in your example code in hex?