Am 2014-09-14 12:08, schrieb Mattias Gaertner: >> > All seasoned programmers know that and try to avoid the with statement. > The quote is from Marius, not from me.
Correct. I deleted the wrong reference. ;-( >> Realy? I love it. Consider these two varianst of code from one of my programs: >> >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> with TreeRoot.SubDirs[Low(TreeRoot.SubDirs)]^ do >> begin >> DirLogged := true; >> DirHatFocus := false; >> SubDirsExpanded := true; >> [...] >> --------------------------------------------------------- > > and > > --------------------------------------------------------- > d:=TreeRoot.SubDirs[Low(TreeRoot.SubDirs)]; // local var d > d^.DirLogged := true; > d^.DirHatFocus := false; > d^.SubDirsExpanded := true; > [...] --------------------------------------------------------- Long-winded and still not the same clarity as in the with statement. Do you also prepent *all* function and variable names with the unit name they come from? Do you realy *always* write LazUTF8.UTF8Delete instead of UTF8Delete ? Nested WITH statements and the unit concept share the same problem but still the benefits outweigh the drawbacks IMO (once you get used to it and keep possible problems in mind). _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
