Am 2012-08-22 13:45, schrieb Lukasz Sokol: > Recompilation when one of units/libraries was upgraded, almost always implies > rebuild. Who on Earth is so trigger-happy to upgrade, rebuild and not test for > regressions? This is the only sane way to get the process going - document it > *as MML said below*;
That's not the point. Why on earth should a programmer *not* get as much help as possible from a programming language/compiler? That's the genuine purpose of a programming language. Why stick with flaws if they are avoidable? *If* the issue Timothy reported can be avoided why *not* doing it? It would help avoiding many problems and reduce testing time. Although I have not such a strong feeling about it I would still appreciate the suggested addition. It would add a function for safer programming without drawbacks (except the coding effort of course). Though I don't know whether it can be implemented easily (if at all). _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
