Dennis Poon wrote:
For what it's worth, I'm ambivalent. Not because I feel that try
stacks couldn't or shouldn't be simplified, but because I feel that
whoever overloaded try for two different structures should be shot.
I don't know enough about compiler. Could you kindly elaborate on the
above please?
There are two distinct programming structures, with- as I understand it-
significantly different code generation requirements. Both are
introduced by the reserved word "try".
The first structure, which is broadly comparable with most modern
languages, is
try
..
raise...
..
except
..
end;
with "raise" transferring control to the exception handler.
The second structure is
try
..
finally
..
end;
and I might be wrong but I don't think there's an analogue of "raise" in
this case.
In my own scripting stuff I've used
start
..
stop...
..
finally
..
end;
This obviously doesn't reduce verbosity, but my own opinion is that it
improves clarity since you won't in general encounter
try
try
..
and then have to go to the end of the blocks to work out what's intended.
In principle it would be possible to define "start" as a macro, but I
don't know how badly that would confuse Lazarus/Synedit highlighting and
code folding. In practice it's completely incompatible with Delphi (and,
as far as I know, every other Pascal variant) so is probably not a habit
to get into.
--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk
[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
