Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Al Boldi wrote:
> > This really has nothing to do with resources. Resources should still be
> > saved in its own .res file.
>
> Forms are stored in resources. A dfm is changed to resource and then
> compiled in the binary ?
The .dfm is being used for two things:
1. create resource
2. create code init
It's the code init that's objectionable, because it removes code control.
> > This is about code init, and as such should not be mutilated into some
> > obscure hardcoded "code init" translator, but instead be obviously
> > exposed for code control.
>
> There is certainly something to be said for this point of view, but they
> obviously thought otherwise: Do not forget that in the TP days, it was
> done like you propose, with their Turbo Vision.
Was Turbo Vision the Delphi codename, or do you mean Object Vision?
> If they switched to
> resources, they probably had their reasons for it. Two of them, which I
> happen to know, I explained in my initial response to Graeme.
I think they changed because they saw VB, and wanted to mimic them. This
doesn't mean Delphi was a VB copy-cat, on the contrary, VB was an Object
Vision copy-cat, but VB beat Delphi to market, then Delphi copied VB's .frm.
> There is always a history for each choice. This is so for Delphi, and for
> FPC/Lazarus too. People may not know it any more after X years, but that
> doesn't mean it didn't exist. At best, you can question it's current
> validity.
Thanks!
--
Al
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
