2013/10/26 waldo kitty <wkitt...@windstream.net> > On 10/26/2013 7:06 PM, Fabrício Srdic wrote: > >> If the namespace feature isn't a improvement, so why was it added to fpc? > > because FPC (and lazarus) strives to be better? and to not alienate > those who use it by forcing them to adjust all their working code when a > new version comes out? >
I'm a Delphi user for years. So, let me see: D2009 "forced" us to adjust our existing code base to its new UnicodeString support, but in return it give us internationalization support and new possibilities. D2010 have introduced the namespace feature and DXE2 "forced" us to adjust our existing code base to its new unit scope names - namespace of its base units - but in return it give us new possibilities to organize our existing code base through namespaces, a feature that is present in all other entreprise-class dev platforms - e.g Java and .NET - promoting code reuse and providing us a more clear RTL and API. Other examples include the addition of Generics and the changes to many classes like TList and so on. Today, after "forced" us to adjusting our code base many times, Delphi provide us generics, closures, namespaces and internationalization support. Its a great evolution, do not you think? On the other hand, fpc community seems to be resistent to implement some improvements - sorry, "changes" - that Delphi already has because it "forces" the users to adjust some peaces of their existing code base. So, what do you mean when say "be better than Delphi"? Be more backward compatible and in other hand have fewer features than Delphi? I really don't understand this kind of reaction.
_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal