VFP require switch to compiler to accept the "." instead of the ":" in terms of OO syntax to make compilation of VFP code easier.
Possible do in a lib? 2010/2/15 Viktor Szakáts <[email protected]> > Hi Maurilio and All, > > On 2010 Feb 15, at 10:39, Maurilio Longo wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I see that there are xpp compatibility objects available inside src/rtl > and > > inside contrib/xpp which make me wonder why we have a xpp library when > part of > > it is already inside runtime library. > > > > Shouldn't the xpp compatibility bits be inside xpp library only? > > Yes, that's the plan. I left them there in core for > compatibility and to gather some feedback until final > decision. > > Actually the issue is wider, as we have FoxPro, > FlagShip and C53 functions in core, which would > require similar "treatment". > > My idea was to move all non-C52e function to > "dialect" libs. Questions are: where to draw > the line? (f.e. C53 may be better left in core), > and how to name and where to place these "dialect" > libs. > > Probably it would be best to keep them in contrib > area, and give them some distinctive lib prefix, > f.e. 'hdxpp', 'hdxhb', 'hdfs', 'hdclip', 'hdfox'. > > If we agree on the naming, placement and the fact > that some .prg-level FlagShip, FoxPro stuff will > move out from core. I'm ready to make the move. > > Opinions are welcome. > > Brgds, > Viktor > > _______________________________________________ > Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) > [email protected] > http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour > -- Massimo Belgrano
_______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) [email protected] http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
