In our previous episode, Ryan Joseph said: > > complicating it even more. The consequences of such a step are far-reaching. > > > > And till now, no-one has presented the really pressing use cases that would > > warrant such a step. > > How can you integrate a preprocessor without misaligning error messages > and debugging information?
Have the preprocessor generate some form of lineinfo that your IDE can mine? > I put this into the category of dogma because we?re being asked to provide > ?valid? use cases instead of trusting that we have know what?s best for > our own code. Then trust us that we know our business with respect to the compiler internals. > It?s not possible to know in advance what people may need > so providing them good tools as a fail safe is only sensible. Good and "fail" are horribly subjective here. > My own case I had just know was hard coded some vertex data from a C > program and if I had a good macro syntax I could have finished it much > quicker and it would have looked nicer. It doesn?t matter if this was > ?best practice? or not. I just wanted to finish it so I could move on to > more important things. Which is an argument that can be made for every external language feature. Not really convincing. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal