Pada Rabu, 24 Februari 2016 18:40, Marco van de Voort <mar...@stack.nl> menulis:
> In our previous episode, Mark Morgan Lloyd said:
> > > (remember recent discussion about IfThen pseudo-function).
> >
> > More relevant to your situation, I remember discussion about adding an
> > identifier to WITH to use as an explicit shortcut, i.e. something like
> >
> > with foo= bar do
> > foo.someField := ...
>
> Not relevant since the With code in this case must remain delphi compatible.>
Sometimes I just don't understand the policy of FPC devs about Delphi
compatibility. In some cases, they said FPC isn't a slave of Delphi, FPC should
have better goal than Delphi, there's the Delphi way and there's the FPC way,
breaking old codes is consequence of a change, bla bla bla….
But in some other times, like now in this case, the 'with' case, they said that
it must be Delphi compatible, don't break old codes, keep the compatibility,
bla bla bla…. Like when they responded to my proposal to set {$J-} as default
because that's how a const is suppose to be. And it's the default now on Delphi
as well.
Maybe FPC devs should give us the "rule" or policy about what kind of change
that is acceptable and not acceptable. So when we think of something new we
could look at the rule and if it's doesn't comply then we don't need to bother
to propose.
Regards,
–Mr Bee
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
