Marco van de Voort wrote:
Some of these target functionality (specially in the linking section) might
require restructures
related to
* introduction of an internal linker for some core platforms (no more LD)
* Rewrite of module (unit) handling
Yes, these would be great, IMHO.
For the rest, improve RTL/FCL compability and extend them in general, and of
course fixbugs.
Beside of compatibility towards Delphi or MacPascal or others FPC should be
open to other modifications/extensions (maybe Delphi one day copies FC a bt
:-), and not always the other way round)
Maybe a few things should be borrowed from RemObjects Chrome, such as
-- Class Contracts
http://www.remobjects.com/page.asp?id={DFA00D71-D5A4-40A3-9FD0-251899EB30D8}
I like the 'require/ensure' aproach.
It makes the code more robust and more debuggable, IMHO
-- Generics
http://www.remobjects.com/articles/?id={A1D08EE3-0D9E-4828-AFB3-B2C1E772186E}
I am not sure if Generics could be done in FPC.
-- Virtual Properties and Events
http://www.remobjects.com/page.asp?id={10E153AD-E05F-48CE-9CED-BCED5C9CDE99}
-- Enhanced Multicast Events
http://www.remobjects.com/page.asp?id={CC9C4828-9E49-4C41-AFD9-0BFFA4E9C3D3}
Inline variable initializers, such as:
type
TSomethingElse = class(TSomething)
private
FInteger: Integer = 15;
FBoolean: Boolean = False;
FString: String = 'SOME TEXT';
{etc}
protected
public
published
end;
Similarly, for
function Something(...): Boolean = False;
var
Integer1: Integer = 15;
Boolean1: Boolean = False;
String1: String = 'SOME TEXT';
begin
end;
Procedure Something(Out AInteger: Integer = 12; ....);
var
Integer1: Integer = 15;
Boolean1: Boolean = False;
String1: String = 'SOME TEXT';
begin
end;
Useful extensions I would see:
bigger sets: set of -100000..100000 (e.g.)
I'd like that too.
Me too.
a way to write integer constants in any base, not only
binary/octal/hexadecimal (not so important, but easy to implement)
Rarely used. Specially since more than base 36 becomes a notational
> problem. However it has been brought up before.
If someone contributes the code, why not. It does not hurt, IMHO.
writing of enums to text file;
This should be supported, however needs some tricks. (RTTI is available for
enums!)
Yes. Ditto.
more operators which can be overloaded (should follow the ALGOL68 rules)
IMHO this is asking for a mess, and the use is limited.
Again, agreed.
multiple assignments:
a := b := c := d := 0 ;
etc.
Same point. Totally useless.
Not really useful. More like confusing, to me, that is.
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
