On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 2:39 AM, Martin Schreiber <mse00...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > One does not need to use "class", it can be removed. I thought that
>> > people comming from Free Pascal will like it. ;-)
>>
>> You could be right, but I think they will like more if not exist ambiguity.
>> :)
>
> Other opinions? Should "class" be removed?

Well, if ^TObj is the same as class and you will continue using this
syntax then, yes, I think class should be removed.
But maybe we should think more about it.

>> So, is not better to do this?
>>
>> 1. obj4ty = object(tobject)
>> 2. obj9ty = object(tobject, testintf)
>>
>> I mean, we always need to write the ancestor.
>> It will always look the same.
>>
> MSElang supports objects with interfaces but no ancestor. TObject is no part
> of language but part of the RTL for Free Pascal compatibility.
> The syntax has been be changed to

Hmm, I understood.

> "
> type
>  obj9ty = object(nil,testinf)
>  end;
> "
> Reading https://github.com/yegor256/eo I fear you are against NIL too. ;-)

Touché!  :)
But this is better because now we don't have a "ghost argument" to
create an object.

Best regards,
Marcos Douglas

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
mseide-msegui-talk mailing list
mseide-msegui-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mseide-msegui-talk

Reply via email to