Sven Barth-2 wrote > > Am 29.08.2012 22:56 schrieb "Arioch" <AriochThe@>: > I don't know whether you tested recent versions of FPC, but since 2.6.0 > the > support for Delphi compatible generics improved, though generic > functions/methods and constraints are still missing. >
Thanks. No, i just checked wiki and docs and referenced mailing lists letters. Last time i worked with Lazarus were times of Linux transition from 2.4 to 2.6. Don't recall exactly but that was ooold times :-) Personally i think that introducing yet more keywords is not good thing, when can be avoided. But since it was done, i did not think that FPC would both implement their native syntax with generics/specialize keywords and keywordless Delphi style. Lack of generic methods and corresponded partially to it lack of modern RTTI is pity, but hopefully would be resolved. PS. Checking available docs, besides, was how i came to the topic and was wondered that no one answered why closures matter. It is surely personal test to like or dislike them. I already said that they can make code hardly readable and hardly debugable is over-used. And that Delphi model of them makes them impractical for oneliners (where their true power lies) and only practical for complex routines (where they are problematic) Howeveri wished that their benefits at least were outlined in the thread, referenced from wiki. -- View this message in context: http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Delphi-s-anonymous-functions-in-Free-Pascal-tp4911527p5711054.html Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
