On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 19:05:51 -0400 Anthony Walter <sys...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Because in theory you should get code insight when you type > Identified(dot). From a style perspective I also tend to avoid underscores > in my own identifiers. I reserve underscores for methods you normally > shouldn't call (_AddRef), or for imported C code (MAX_PATH, type_). > > Also, I am sure you know dotted unit namespaces are an addition to Free > Pascal. They are familiar to C#/Java people, and probably look better > (style-wise) to them. In short words: aesthetic reasons and to please people from other languages. Right? > If they see dotted unit namespaces in some Free > Pascal demos they might be more be tempted to give Free Pascal a look > rather than running away (especially if the first thing they see when > looking at a Free Pascal example is a list of large identifiers with 2 or > more underscores each). What example has a large list of identifiers with many underscores? Why is that better than a large list with many dots? Mattias -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus