On 02/27/2015 07:39 PM, Sven Barth wrote:
Considering that they are activated by the local switch "{$interfaces
corba}" (and the reference counted ones by "{$interfaces com}") you
hardly can't blame anyone for using these terms...
I did not want to blame mse to use the term, but fpc for forc
On 27.02.2015 16:12, Michael Schnell wrote:
On 02/27/2015 11:50 AM, Martin Schreiber wrote:
Correct. MSEgui extensively uses corba style interfaces.
Nice.
-Michael (still thinking that using a term like "corba style" for
language internals is decently smelly).
Considering that they are activ
On 02/27/2015 11:50 AM, Martin Schreiber wrote:
Correct. MSEgui extensively uses corba style interfaces.
Nice.
-Michael (still thinking that using a term like "corba style" for
language internals is decently smelly).
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fp
On Friday 27 February 2015 11:33:55 Marco van de Voort wrote:
> >
> > - where/how is this clearly (disregarding external stuff interfaces
> > might *additionally* be useful to handle) documented ?
>
> I don't know. I guess Michael and Graeme are the main corba interface
> consumers with the obser
In our previous episode, Michael Schnell said:
> > (I don't know how Delphi implements Corba interfaces, it had a own
> > broker for some time)
> Sorry, but I feel we are loosing tack of the original focus of this
> thread: "what is a save replacement of multiple inheritance of classes ? "
>
>
On 02/26/2015 07:45 PM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
(I don't know how Delphi implements Corba interfaces, it had a own
broker for some time)
Sorry, but I feel we are loosing tack of the original focus of this
thread: "what is a save replacement of multiple inheritance of classes ? "
- Obviousl
In our previous episode, Michael Schnell said:
> In fact I did understand I only am puzzled by the naming "COM" vs
> "CORBA", that in no way suggest the real (language-) functionality "ref
> counting" vs "not ref counting"
IIRC there was discussion back then about having non COM interfaces. Corb
Am 26.02.2015 15:43 schrieb "Graeme Geldenhuys" <
mailingli...@geldenhuys.co.uk>:
>
> On 2015-02-26 14:34, Michael Schnell wrote:
> > In fact I did understand I only am puzzled by the naming "COM" vs
> > "CORBA", that in no way suggest the real (language-) functionality "ref
> > counting" vs "not r
Am 26.02.2015 15:43 schrieb "Graeme Geldenhuys" <
mailingli...@geldenhuys.co.uk>:
>
> On 2015-02-26 14:34, Michael Schnell wrote:
> > In fact I did understand I only am puzzled by the naming "COM" vs
> > "CORBA", that in no way suggest the real (language-) functionality "ref
> > counting" vs "not r
On 2015-02-26 14:34, Michael Schnell wrote:
> In fact I did understand I only am puzzled by the naming "COM" vs
> "CORBA", that in no way suggest the real (language-) functionality "ref
> counting" vs "not ref counting"
I know COM interface come from the need to interact with Windows COM.
CORBA
On 02/26/2015 03:29 PM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
I think you miss understood CORBA interfaces. I don’t know why it was
named as such in FPC, but it definitely doesn’t require or depend on
an external framework or services etc. CORBA interfaces are simply
interfaces (language feature) without re
On 2015-02-26 13:48, Michael Schnell wrote:
> Neither "COM" nor "CORBA" is something that is imposed by the language,
> but it's features are due to some external framework.
I think you miss understood CORBA interfaces. I don’t know why it was
named as such in FPC, but it definitely doesn’t requi
On 02/26/2015 02:04 PM, Marcos Douglas wrote:
FPC give us the option to use CORBA or "COM" interfaces.
Neither "COM" nor "CORBA" is something that is imposed by the language,
but it's features are due to some external framework.
While "interface" (as discussed in this thread) is a language fea
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 7:33 AM, Michael Schnell wrote:
> On 02/26/2015 11:28 AM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
>>
>>
>> Not ALL interfaces are reference-counted and auto-destroying. You can
>> create CORBA-style interfaces which are _not_ reference counted but
>> still have the full advantage of a int
On 02/26/2015 11:28 AM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Not ALL interfaces are reference-counted and auto-destroying. You can
create CORBA-style interfaces which are _not_ reference counted but
still have the full advantage of a interface.
I see.
hence "interface" denotes two language constructs that
On 2015-02-25 09:23, Michael Schnell wrote:
> reference-counted and auto-destroying
Not ALL interfaces are reference-counted and auto-destroying. You can
create CORBA-style interfaces which are _not_ reference counted but
still have the full advantage of a interface.
Regards,
- Graeme -
--
fp
On 02/25/2015 10:40 AM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
Strictly speaking it is possible to have interfaces to some external
entity that does not map to the own class type.
I suppose this is why Borland once invented them: not for the purpose
suggested in the "Blog", but to mirror some external wind
On 02/25/2015 10:40 AM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
They are not autocreating.
???
I seem to remember that I once did a test implementing an arithmetic
with interfaces and there was no need to call create. Maybe I am fooled
by my old brain.
-Michael
___
In our previous episode, Michael Schnell said:
> > Exactly. Interface delegation solves this problem, that is why it was
> > invented.
>
> How does this correspond to the fact that (AFAIK) interfaces are
> auto-creating, reference-counted and auto-destroying, while classes are
> not ?
>
> Ore
On 02/24/2015 09:55 PM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
Exactly. Interface delegation solves this problem, that is why it was
invented.
How does this correspond to the fact that (AFAIK) interfaces are
auto-creating, reference-counted and auto-destroying, while classes are
not ?
Ore is this ju
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 24 Feb 2015, at 16:41, Bee wrote:
This is an interesting article about interface and multiple inheritance in
Java.
http://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2015/01/08/InterfaceConsideredHarmful.html
I wonder, how modern Pascal (FreePascal in particul
In our previous episode, Bee said:
>
> http://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2015/01/08/InterfaceConsideredHarmful.html
>
> I wonder, how modern Pascal (FreePascal in particular) answer the
> questions. :)
I don't actually see questions why you shouldn't have interfaces. I only see
reasons in tho
On 24 Feb 2015, at 16:41, Bee wrote:
This is an interesting article about interface and multiple
inheritance in
Java.
http://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2015/01/08/InterfaceConsideredHarmful.html
I wonder, how modern Pascal (FreePascal in particular) answer the
questions. :)
Couldn't he
Hi,
This is an interesting article about interface and multiple inheritance in
Java.
http://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2015/01/08/InterfaceConsideredHarmful.html
I wonder, how modern Pascal (FreePascal in particular) answer the
questions. :)
Regards,
--
-Bee-
__
24 matches
Mail list logo
