On 26 July 2010 18:30, Marco van de Voort <mar...@stack.nl> wrote: > > If your idea was really so great, and this was really a solution, why don't > you simply describe it?
Yeah, yeah, we all know you have a terrible time maintaining FPC. Most people can maintain legacy software, and still see chance for adding and improving it. [sorry, could not resist] Picking longer names for units will also only take you so far, then you will start getting conflicts with those too, then what? I already changed fpGUI's classes to what I thought would be "safe", and look... three years later I see FPC use similar prefixed class names. That idea lasted long - with a saving grace that the unit names differed. Just offering negative comments and shooting down ideas, do not help this or any other discussion. If you give negative comments, try back it up with an additional suggestion or two. That would be a lot more helpful to this discussion and allow us to more easily find a solution that fit most. G. _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
