On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Lars <nore...@z505.com> wrote: > > Daniel Gaspary wrote: > > Any special reason to Advanced Records be available only in Delphi Mode ? > > > Personally, I'm getting sick of all the new features added to delphi that > don't add anything meaningful, and just add complexity to the compiler. > why didn't borland just make people use old borland objects with methods > instead of new advanced records? Old borland objects are advanced > records..
+1 > Ticking me off more: why do we even have objects and classes? what is an > object? what are classes? I would have preferred if borland would have > just called old borland objects "Extended records" from day one. Now we > have this feature overload in the language and it's becoming more and more > complex of a language (needlessly). +1 again. I agree that becoming the language more and more complex needlessly. > Objects, Classes, records.. aren't > they all the same thing? As I think you know, record type defines a "data group"; (old) object is a record with functions; classe type is the improvement of both. > I don't even personally buy the idea that objects > even exist.. i think they are just extended records. Oh, they exist... but you also right, they are extended records, we can say. > What is an object? an > instance of a class? if so, why did borland call the type definition > "object" if it was supposed to be a class? Ugh. Ugly language - it is > becoming - sorry to say! I think Borland erred in definition of object type. So they improved to class type! =) Marcos Douglas _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
