In our previous episode, Sven Barth said: > > Please do not reference count TObject. This is a uniquely bad and > > unnecessary idea. I will switch to ANSI C if you guys do it > > Please enlighten me why you think it is bad. Give reasons and don't be > like "a farmer doesn't eat what he doesn't know" (rough translation of a > German proverb).
Performance, size increase of minimal tobject. Both are killing for existing light object in memory frameworks. > And just to give you a reason *for* reference counted objects: they > would finally allow to use operator overloads on classes, because then > temporarily created objects are created correctly (think about an > expression like "a * (b + c)" with classes). Boring. > Please also note that I said that I don't consider them to be the holy > grail especially considering that I know of some of the technial > problems one needs to face when implementing them in an already existing > language. The point is that it shouldn't hurt, so IMHO should stay away from the base type. DO whatever you want for your own root object-and-down, but don't force it upon others. _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
