On 13/08/2014 08:24, Alex Peshkoff wrote: > > Is this syntax Delphi-compatible? > :-) > I've wrote that I've used to work with Pascal >25 years ago. For example > I've used objects cause they are just present in language docs before > classes. But as long as we do not talk about implementations there is no > big difference between class and object, may be just small syntax sugar.
In some Free Pascal docs say a object is like a record with can have methods. I didn't remember something like this from Delphi. > Therefore it's hard for me to estimate is the syntax compatible. What > about classes - in FPC manual it's noticed that they were added > primarily to support Delphi, i.e. from general estimates syntax should > be OK. > > Are you building implementations for C++ only or for other languages too? My FPC test has about use (client) and implementation. > What do you think about adding different styles of C++ code generation? Maybe. > First of all I think about support of smart pointers. I think this is left to callers, but... > Next - ability to > have implementation without Impl in the end of function names. Already done. Implementation of objects uses virtual functions and dispatchers dispatches directly to them, without additional cost, via obj->Name::method(). > Some > people (who never need to use full C++ power, just to write single > plugin) already say - with new interface it will be hard to understand > where what function to use. ?? Adriano ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
