I agree 100%.
They are not doing hacks however. I have read some of the books written by
them, and they have followed a very strict scientific approach. It really
made my head spin at the time ;-) . I have done some STL compliant
containers, and yes I hate it, but I was able to do it.
There are better languages for conceptual programming, from what I have
heard but we seem to be stuck with C++ and OPascal for the moment ;-) . We
will do our best with them.
Hopefully the next C++ standard will help a bit in this area and will allow
concept declarations and validations.
The problem is that conceptual programming actually is a totally different
concept from the OOP and one of the requirements is that the concept must be
hierarchy impendent, so you can make any existing class concept compliant at
any level and point.
I made existing library STL compliant without touching the hierarchy which I
was not allowed to do any way and it worked.
All this simply does not seem to be doable with generics.
With best regards,
Boian Mitov
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitov Software
http://www.mitov.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ales Katona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "FPC developers' list" <fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: [fpc-devel]
RussianlocaleinformationnotcompatiblewithFPClocalevariables
Note that I'm not trying to do a "who can piss further" thing here. Just
saying that IMHO the way C++ does this isn't exactly great.
The idea behind it is nice, however apart from pure OOP approach I don't
see much choice of how to do this nicely.
Ales
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
