09.01.13, 20:57, Michael Fuchs wrote:
Am 08.01.2013 23:43, schrieb Paul Ishenin:
What is the best way for a discussion on this? Should I create a feature
request in bugtracker?
First create a desired implementation with a patch.
I would do it, if I only know where to start. Unfortunately are
Am 08.01.2013 23:43, schrieb Paul Ishenin:
What is the best way for a discussion on this? Should I create a feature
request in bugtracker?
First create a desired implementation with a patch.
I would do it, if I only know where to start. Unfortunately are my
experiences in compiler programmin
On Tue, January 8, 2013 23:43, Paul Ishenin wrote:
> 09.01.13, 6:26, Michael Fuchs пишет:
>
>> What is the best way for a discussion on this? Should I create a feature
>> request in bugtracker?
>
> First create a desired implementation with a patch.
Well, I may overlook something, of course, but I
09.01.13, 6:26, Michael Fuchs пишет:
What is the best way for a discussion on this? Should I create a feature
request in bugtracker?
First create a desired implementation with a patch.
Best regards,
Paul Ishenin
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pasca
Am 08.01.2013 17:33, schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
+1
The current behaviour (even if Delphi compatible) seems just wrong -
totally defeats the point of "abstract" in object design!
What is the best way for a discussion on this? Should I create a feature
request in bugtracker?
Michael
_
On 01/08/13 12:33, Michael Fuchs wrote:
>
> For example a compiler error in {$MODE ObjFpc} and the actual behaviour
> in {$MODE Delphi}. That would not break compatibility, but gets a nice
> feature for FPC.
+1
The current behaviour (even if Delphi compatible) seems just wrong -
totally defeat
Am 08.01.2013 13:29, schrieb Paul Ishenin:
Abstract class feature is implemented the same way as it is done in
delphi. In delphi it does not raise any error, so it works in FPC. The
only limitation is that you can't both set sealed and abstract for the
same class.
Maybe later delphi will come wi
08.01.13, 19:48, Michael Fuchs пишет:
I thougt this would cause a compiler error, while creating a abstract
class. Surprisingly it compiles, even without a warning.
Do I have to use any compiler switches or is there no sense in using the
abstract keyword for a class?
Abstract class feature is
Am 08.01.2013 13:06, schrieb Howard Page-Clark:
TAbstractClass = class abstract(TObject)
>
'Casting' a class as abstract is curious syntax. What led you to think
of that? But obviously the compiler knows it.
This is no casting, it is the new abstract class syntax coming from delphi.
As s
On 08/1/13 11:48, Michael Fuchs wrote:
program AbstractTest;
{$MODE ObjFpc}{$H+}
uses Classes;
type
TAbstractClass = class abstract(TObject)
end;
var
MyAbstractClass: TAbstractClass = nil;
begin
MyAbstractClass := TAbstractClass.Create;
MyAbstractClass.Free;
end.
'Casting' a
Hello,
I have the following test program:
program AbstractTest;
{$MODE ObjFpc}{$H+}
uses Classes;
type
TAbstractClass = class abstract(TObject)
end;
var
MyAbstractClass: TAbstractClass = nil;
begin
MyAbstractClass := TAbstractClass.Create;
MyAbstractClass.Free;
end.
I thougt this
11 matches
Mail list logo
