Am 13.09.2017 11:59 schrieb "Mattias Gaertner via Lazarus" < lazarus@lists.lazarus-ide.org>: > > On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 11:40:23 +0200 > Mattias Gaertner via Lazarus <lazarus@lists.lazarus-ide.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 11:19:58 +0200 > > Sven Barth via Lazarus <lazarus@lists.lazarus-ide.org> wrote: > > > > >[...] > > > The "." allows for a nicer disambiguation between what's the prefix and > > > what's the remainder. Granted, that can be done with "_" as well, but in my > > > personal opinion a "." simply looks nicer. :) > > > > I don't get why disambiguity is "nicer". The compiler has to > > backstep and try all combinations to find out what a.b.c means. > > I meant ambiguity. ;)
I'm not talking about ambiguity, I'm talking about aesthetics: FooBar.Blubb is easier to discern visually than FooBarBlubb. Also were is there an ambiguity anyway (given all units are used with their full name)? The compiler reads (in my above example) the token sequence ID Point ID and thus can find the unit without any backtracking just as for ordinary methods. Even once the default namespace option is added that won't change as the compiler will simply test all provided namespaces as prefixes and then the name as is. It's just a longer list of names than usually to test for. Regards, Sven
-- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus-ide.org https://lists.lazarus-ide.org/listinfo/lazarus
