On 20.03.2011 12:23, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 16 Mar 2011, at 09:30, Sven Barth wrote:
Am 15.03.2011 19:18, schrieb Alexander Klenin:
IMHO the syntax difference is so small it does not worth all the complications.
However, as a compromise I can suggest inplementing it as:
TypeIdentifier = [class|record] helper(ParentHelper) for ExtendedType
i.e. make "class|record" keyword optional in objfpc mode, but do NOT
allow it after "for". This way, objfpc syntax will be
backwards-compatible with Delphi.
That idea isn't that bad... (of course Jonas' point of increasing the parser's
complexity still holds ^^)
There's also another problem: I don't know whether Delphi currently does this, but in principle if
both a class and a record with the same name are in scope (in case of nested types, or simply from
different units), depending on whether you use "class helper" or "record
helper" one or the other type could be picked by the compiler. Alternatively, it could always
choose the first matched type and if it's not respectively a class or a record, the compiler could
give an error.
So I think it is really best to stick to the Delphi syntax, and the Delphi
syntax only.
I have already decided not to proceed with my idea, but thank you for
the next point against it. :)
Regards,
Sven
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
