on compiler implementation:
I read in this list that the group lost months due a "with" problem. People use "with", and I guess lot of people use it! I checked the reference http://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/ref/refsu58.html#x155-16500013.2.8 and there is not any warning ... just: The statement With A,B,C,D do Statement; is equivalent to With A do With B do With C do With D do Statement; without any warning ... (and there is noting about the syntax with xxx[ nn]^ = A do ... describe by someone earlier) I am not telling that an implementation in the compiler should be of higher priority!!! I appreciate a lot the great job that has been done, and is still going on! I know I won't be able to do it!!! I'ld really like to contribute ... but ... my age and qualification ... won't help very much!!! But I am pretty sure that this implementation could have saved many time to many people (as one of the developper wrote) ... and still may save. But as it has been written ... we may be out of subject! Philippe Em 16.09.2014 11:08, Ewald escreveu: > On 09/16/2014 03:41 PM, Philippe wrote: > >> I imagine that who really want to get rid from the hint ... don´t use Pascal anyway! or do have strong test tools!!! one point is that (many?) people use "with" ... and compiler can make it safer. may be as described Frederic Da Vitoria ... producing error when may be confused. (but let configure it!) > > The issue is that when you introduce this hint, it is almost certain > that someone will ask `how to disable that hint?` on this list. > > IMO it would be a waste of time to implement such a thing. If I were a > developer (hmm, actually I am one :-) ), and I would work on a project > like FPC (meaning: in my free time, not getting paid to do the job), I > would invest my time in something that actually means something, like > fixing a bug, optimizing the RTL for a specific target, writing > documentation, etc... We are programmers after all, not end users who > want to be treated with silken gloves. > > You've only got 10 choices really: either you like the `with` statement, > or you don't. In the latter case don't use it. Remember that the > original question was about functionality, what this thread has now > evolved into is, in my opinion, off-topic.
_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal