Marco van de Voort wrote: >> Changing type to something which is not a descendant (and thus >> incompatible) seems useless and always dangerous to me, so should be >> forbidden if possible. > > I also considered it that way. But maybe the "absolute" keyword is then a > bit badly chosen, since it implies memory overlaying, no questions asked.
Yes, agree, but the way of use is so similar. Maybe the other usages should get this checking as well ;-). Maybe 'override' instead, but that one is so closely tied to functions, and implies something 'virtual' as well. Micha _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
