>
> To summarize: From the language/compiler point of view, large files are
> no problem. We already concluded that, and in some cases the language
> even forces you to use large files.
>
> But, from a personal - human point of view, large files are not always
> nice. At least, some people think so
On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 16:56 +0300, Nikolai ZHUBR wrote:
> Wednesday, January 06, 2010, 2:47:24 PM, Juha Manninen wrote:
>
> > On keskiviikko, 6. tammikuuta 2010 13:14:18 Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
> >> Why ? Every class in 1 file is perfectly possible with include files, and 1
> >> big unit fil
Wednesday, January 06, 2010, 2:47:24 PM, Juha Manninen wrote:
> On keskiviikko, 6. tammikuuta 2010 13:14:18 Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>> Why ? Every class in 1 file is perfectly possible with include files, and 1
>> big unit file.
> Ok, include files seem to solve this problem.
> I don't know w
Tuesday, January 05, 2010, 11:08:37 PM, Juha Manninen wrote:
> On tiistai, 5. tammikuuta 2010 20:06:42 Florian Klaempfl wrote:
>> Then do the same as in C++ and put it in different include files.
> Right, include files could solve this problem at least partly. They seem to be
Curious enough, nobo
On 05/01/2010, JoshyFun wrote:
>
> interface
> [...]
> {$I InterfaceOnly C:\.pas}
> [...]
> Implementation
> {$I ImplementationOnly C:\.pas}
> [...]
>
> I think it will not include a big penalty in the parser, or maybe I'm
> completly wrong ?
I have done with with 100's of inclu
Hello Florian,
Tuesday, January 5, 2010, 7:06:42 PM, you wrote:
FK> I never looked at VirtualTreeView but I doubt that the 34k line source
FK> is a language problenm.
>> Programmer should have a choice to split it
FK> Good languages prevent programms to do ugly things :)
>> if he wants.
This is
