I suppose we are discussing the Delphi language keyword "interface" and
it's implementation in free pascal.
-Michael
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
>> One advantage is that it can be easely used on many languages,
>> althougth the usefulness of that for ideintf is probably very small.
>>
>I suppose you mean programming languages not spoken languages.
>But Interface is a Delphi language keyword. I don't see what this has
to with C or whate
One advantage is that it can be easely used on many languages,
althougth the usefulness of that for ideintf is probably very small.
I suppose you mean programming languages not spoken languages.
But Interface is a Delphi language keyword. I don't see what this has to
with C or whatever.
On Nov 30, 2007 10:12 AM, Michael Schnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What is the advantage of interfaces anyway (seems that I have been
> missing something ... )
One advantage is that it can be easely used on many languages,
althougth the usefulness of that for ideintf is probably very small.
-
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:22:54 +0100 (CET)
> Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Paul Ishenin wrote:
> >
> > > Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> > > > No-one. The DLL must be recompiled anyway if you use pa
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:22:54 +0100 (CET)
Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Paul Ishenin wrote:
>
> > Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> > > No-one. The DLL must be recompiled anyway if you use packages.
> > > And this is also true if you use interfaces, so usin
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Paul Ishenin wrote:
> Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> > No-one. The DLL must be recompiled anyway if you use packages.
> > And this is also true if you use interfaces, so using interfaces
> > will not solve the problem you mention.
> >
> Only if compiler (who provides packag
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
No-one. The DLL must be recompiled anyway if you use packages.
And this is also true if you use interfaces, so using interfaces
will not solve the problem you mention.
Only if compiler (who provides package system) changed. Ide changes will
not cause recompilation o
I even do have that book right behind me on the shelf.
Silly me should have looked there :(.
-Michael
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Marc Weustink schreef:
Vincent Snijders wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt schreef:
I find classes more natural than interfaces. It 'just works'. Not so
with interfaces, because you must do a typecast every time.
Compare
Function GetPluginInterface : ISOmeThing;
begin
X:=MyPluginObjectXYZ.Creat
OK, Thanks,
-Michael
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Vincent Snijders wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt schreef:
I find classes more natural than interfaces. It 'just works'. Not so
with interfaces, because you must do a typecast every time.
Compare
Function GetPluginInterface : ISOmeThing;
begin
X:=MyPluginObjectXYZ.Create;
Result:=X as ISomet
Michael Van Canneyt schreef:
I find classes more natural than interfaces. It 'just works'.
Not so with interfaces, because you must do a typecast every time.
Compare
Function GetPluginInterface : ISOmeThing;
begin
X:=MyPluginObjectXYZ.Create;
Result:=X as ISomething;
end;
This is then
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Paul Ishenin wrote:
> Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
> > > > Classes:
> > > > - No reference counting mess. - Easier to grasp conceptually.
> > > >
> > > In plugin dll?
> >
> > Sure. Why not ? Obviously, the DLL needs to use packages, but that is
> > understood.
>
> I me
On 30/11/2007, Michael Schnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> What is the advantage of interfaces anyway (seems that I have been
> missing something ... )
>
Many others have answered this already, so I'm not going to type out
the answer. Instead, I'll just quote some of them This should
gi
Since I assume the DLL use is the scenario that is wanted,
it de facto means that you must use widestrings.
What about old fashioned PChar ? Everybody using the Windows and Linux
APIs is used to that.
-Michael
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-deve
Op Fri, 30 Nov 2007, schreef Martin Schreiber:
> On Friday 30 November 2007 10.26, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> >
> > When you pass an interface that uses ansistrings to a DLL,
> > the ansistrings in it (or referenced by it) may be disposed
> > of by the wrong memory manager.
> >
> > Since I ass
On Friday 30 November 2007 10.26, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
> When you pass an interface that uses ansistrings to a DLL,
> the ansistrings in it (or referenced by it) may be disposed
> of by the wrong memory manager.
>
> Since I assume the DLL use is the scenario that is wanted,
> it de facto me
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
Classes:
- No reference counting mess. - Easier to grasp conceptually.
In plugin dll?
Sure. Why not ?
Obviously, the DLL needs to use packages, but that is understood.
I mean what is easier to grasp conceptually when you use class in dll
instead of interface?
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Paul Ishenin wrote:
>
>
> Michael Van Canneyt пишет:
> > On Thu, 29 Nov 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Lazarus has the IDEIntf, the API for IDE plugins.
> > >
> > > What is better in this case: classes or interfaces?
> > >
> >
> > Classes:
> > - No ref
> > What is better in this case: classes or interfaces?
> >
> What is the advantage of interfaces anyway (seems that I have been
> missing something ... )
A limited form of multiple inheritance.
> I _thought_ it would be reference counting, but in the other thread
> someone wants to (and do
What is better in this case: classes or interfaces?
What is the advantage of interfaces anyway (seems that I have been
missing something ... )
I _thought_ it would be reference counting, but in the other thread
someone wants to (and does) use Interfaces without reference counting.
-Mich
Michael Van Canneyt пишет:
On Thu, 29 Nov 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Lazarus has the IDEIntf, the API for IDE plugins.
What is better in this case: classes or interfaces?
Classes:
- No reference counting mess.
- Easier to grasp conceptually.
In plugin dll?
- You can use an
On Thu, 29 Nov 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> Lazarus has the IDEIntf, the API for IDE plugins.
>
> What is better in this case: classes or interfaces?
Classes:
- No reference counting mess.
- Easier to grasp conceptually.
- You can use ansistrings. Interfaces require widestrings. (olestring
Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Lazarus has the IDEIntf, the API for IDE plugins.
What is better in this case: classes or interfaces?
What if someday there are packages?
What if someday there is a closed source dll plugin?
3x Interfaces (you need a shared memmanager in this case)
Additional advantag
25 matches
Mail list logo
