Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
This is only 'logical' if the hypothesis
"productivity is inversely related to the syntax verbosity"
is correct.
And it's not.
What is correct is "productivity is directly related to the number of
separate language constructs developer has to put in program to acomplish
the task"
So, for example, need to put separate finally block to free memory means
additional few constructs. Or lack of standard libary supplied container
apropriate for a task requires programmer to develop his/her own or to adapt
something less usable.
Geeintg rid of end in begin / end wont help much (as they can;t be
separated, they count as single construct).
So here is some little idea which seems to me Pascalish enough to be considered:
how about new keyword: local
Class variable declared local will be automatically freed upon every exit
from the scope (i.e. something along the lines of implicit try/finally for
some builtin types).
And there are possibly few variants of the thing:
1a.
var
mySth: local TSomething;
begin
mySth := TSomething.create();
...
end;
1b.
var
mySth: TSomething local;
begin
mySth := TSomething.create();
...
end;
2.
local
mySth: TSomethin;
begin
mySth := TSomething.create();
...
end;
So in 1. local is just a type modifier (in case of 1a it might make sense to
allow it also in type declaration, hence allowing allways local classes --
but I'm not convinced it's desirable, and it definiately requires more work
on compiler side). 1b. is like some other storage modifiers like absolute
(and might be prefered). 2. is substituting local instead of var for local
objects -- so such local object declarations stand out more int the code,
but it's also further away from standard Pascal.
Is it worth something?
rgds
--
Sebastian Kaliszewski
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
