>>However, IMHO, OO programming ought not to use records anyway.
> Why not? Should something simple like TPoint be an object? Objects can
> also be a nuicense when you just want to hold and pass around simple data.
> I still use records or the old BP7 object model sometimes for simple data
> types.
> TMyPoint = object
> public
> x, y : double;
> function length : double;
> end;
>
> You can define arrays of them, pass them around by value, you dont have to
> dynamically create and destroy them etc etc.
Binding all of your programming style to OOP would be nice and consistent but
introduces
so much additional work that for primitives it really isn't useful. Perhaps some
additional
languages features might assist like the Variable initialisation for locals and
maintained
local object references so that cleanup releases the object.
java has taken some reasonable steps towards this that are quite nice however still
leaving
a gap (for what I would hope are obvious performance reasons) between primitives and
Objects.
One of my biggest gripes is javas lack of a 'Property' syntax that forces the
programmer
to refer to the read and write portions of a property in a syntactically different
manner.
Oh well I think for now I prefer the Delphi way of doing things although java appeals
more and
more and as performance becomes better addressed I may find my loyalties tested.
{BorlandHint}
A fully interface implemented VCL with designed support for delegation might change my
mind
{/BorlandHint}
--
Aaron Scott-Boddendijk
Jump Productions
(07) 838-3371 Voice
(07) 838-3372 Fax
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Zealand Delphi Users group - Delphi List - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website: http://www.delphi.org.nz
