Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, Mark Morgan Lloyd said:
I didn't think this was necessary,
_why_ did you think this?
In part, because the documentation on method declarations at
http://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/ref/refsu25.html#x66-730005.5.1
explicitly allows a virtual method directive, but the documentation on
constructor declarations at
That link also contains a case for constructors, but point taken, the
railroad diagram of constructor could be improved, which might be worthy of
a bugreport.
"Railroad diagram"- I've not heard it called that since I worked for the
Yanks :-) Bugreported as http://mantis.freepascal.org/view.php?id=25770
I also note the comment about classes with virtual methods /having/ to
have an explicit constructor and destructor: does this apply to classes
that have *override* methods or only to parent classes with one or more
*virtual* methods?
--
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 - [email protected]
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
