Mattias Gaertner wrote: > On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 22:41:06 +0100 > Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>Mattias Gaertner wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 19:29:51 +0100 >>>Bram Kuijvenhoven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Micha Nelissen wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 14:45:19 +0100 >>>>>Bram Kuijvenhoven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Does <> for generics fit into Pascal? Well, we use [] for array >>>>> >>>>>indexing, and () for parameter passing to procedures/functions/methods. >>>>>So why not use <> for passing parameters to generic types? And, similar >>>>>to the case of function calls and array indexing, these <> could follow >>>>>the type identifier directly. >>>>> >>>>>You got a point here, but the "where T is Foo" stuff is crap then, >>> >>>don't >>you agree? >>> >>>>>TGType<T: TBaseType> = class(...) ... end; >>>>> >>>>>is better then, when compared to your parameter example. >>>> >>>>I indeed don't like the "where T is foo" of Chrome :) So you are totally >>>>right, TGType<T : TBaseType> is a lot better and a lot more consistent >>>>(with e.g. function parameter syntaxis). >>> >>> >>>Let's sum up the different points for the syntax so far: >>> >>>- <> will probably be used by Delphi >>>- <> bites the < operator >> >>No, as I said, we should allow template instantiation only in type blocks. > > > type > TMyType = boolean(a<b)..(a>b); > > :)
Well, that's no problem either, the compiler knows that the < for parameter instantiation can only follow types being templates/generics :) Parsing is usually type driven in fpc. > > > >>>- <> makes the parser more difficult and slow >> >>See above. >> >> >>>- <> makes pascal more ambigious >> >>See above. >> >> >>>- alternatives: modifiers or not yet used brackets like (! !) or (# #) >> >>Ugly :) > > > Sure. But some people like emoticons. !) > > > > >>>It seems to me, it's a question of: Follow Delphi generics or not. >>>And we don't know, where Delphi will go. They will not have generics in >>>the next one and a half year and as always: They will do a few things >>>completely different than expected. >>>If we follow, then we will do, as Florian et al said. >>>If not, then the <> is not the best solution. >>> >>>Is this correct so far? > > > Ok. So, FPC will follow chrome/Delphi? I would do so, see my mail from the weekend :) _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
