One thing I dislike is the poor abstract implementation. I don't see one good reason to let abstract class be instantiated...
As for records with methods, they are required for delphi.net I think they have just translated it to "native" delphi They seems to have their uses, following is a copy/paste from borland newsgroup: <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< "Iain Macmillan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
There are cases where a record is as good or better than a class. There are more cases where a record with methods is as good or better than a class. Well, there must be. Or why would Borland have bothered to implement records with methods..
Iain, You seem to be in doubt. Records, especially packed records, with methods are very different than classes, when it comes to making the data content persist over time or place. I can think of several important differences: (1) Records can be packed into arrays in RAM or in storage, and moved quickly between. (2) Records need no appended pointer to a VMT or appended length value. (3) Stored records can be used, with programmer care, directly between different programs or versions of the same program. (4) Records may be more difficult to use than class objects if the usage only within the same program. Rgds, JohnH Yeah, there are plenty of cases where you don't need the ability to override anything and you don't have the overhead of a class this way. I still use the old OBJECT structure sometimes simply to get a record with methods. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< -- Vianney Devreese - Lepidosteus http://lepidosteus.com _________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" as the Subject archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
