Travis Siegel via fpc-pascal <fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org> schrieb am Mo., 21. Dez. 2020, 17:41:
> I don't know what non native english speakers are taught, nor can I > address the folks across the pond, but here in the Us at least, has denotes > currently exists, while had indicates past tense, I.E. no longer exists. > Combining the two is where it gets dicy, and is generally avoided for > syntactical reasons. > There is nothing dicy about combining them as "have" is just a normal verb like anything else and thus can be used together with the "have/has/had" temporal particle without any problems. As long as one knows why a certain temporal construct is used there is no problem and at least in Germany (or more specifically Bavaria) we were taught that in masses. Regards, Sven >
_______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
