On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 5:48 PM Sven Barth via fpc-devel < fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org> wrote:
> I'm with Michael here: I see no *need* for a separate syntax for a multi > line string. > I don't really think the suggested backtick way is different enough from anything that exists to be considered a "separate syntax", though. It's the exact same thing, with a one-character difference at the opening and close of the string. If anything I see a use for both the IncludeString directive and multi-line strings. IncludeString would be more suitable for scripts and such as you've suggested, but I can think of a lot of places I'd have liked to have multi-lines strings in the source for stuff like help / options / about text in command-line apps.
_______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
