05.12.2016, 16:38, "Sven Barth" <pascaldra...@googlemail.com>:
Again: I don't see why anyone thinks of generics as complex. Your mail did not answer that in any way.
Hm. I tried :)
I can put it another way.
No language element exists on its own.
And generics are complex because they lead to more accidental complexity for reasons given earlier.
I guess the analogy with bureaucratic papers is valid here.
Too much hassle (new strange and verbose syntax, combination/overload rules are non-obvious) with so low added value.
It comes that using any sufficiently advanced text preprocessor (like m4) gives much more power _without_ added complexity of generics.
For OOP-only, it may be a step forward, but for functional language it's quite a controversy.
--
Regards,
Regards,
Denis Golovan
_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
