Am 22.04.2011 14:01, schrieb michael.vancann...@wisa.be: > > By this rule, the helper class/operator/beast you proposed in the other > mail > should also not be available, because it is not known during definition. > > Just as a helper is 'attached' to a type, an operator is equally > 'attached' to the type. Both can be "attached" by a third party that > requires it : all that is needed to use it is that it is in your current > scope.
IMO a helper is bound closer to a type than an operator. > > To me this means that if you allow the one, you should - logically - > allow the other. > (or vice versa) With the same reasoning, one should allow also functions taking the type as parameter. > > that this probably presents implementation difficulties, Implementation is imo not the problem. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal