<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 01.09.2017 12:15, Maciej Izak wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAFTppY7dHWeX3+6fPqmXgojjS5a_ew8Ss9mtBQ=v7TG6EkswLQ@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">2017-09-01 11:41 GMT+02:00 Stefan
Glienke <span dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:sglienke@dsharp.org" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">sglienke@dsharp.org</a>></span>:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Again you will cause
unnecessary headaches because now your helper has the
dependency of the builtin and the third party one.<br>
How would third party one and third party two implement
them? They both probably would extend the builtin one.
Which one can you use in your code then?<br>
Yes, the one that comes last in the uses. What if you want
to use functions from both? Out of luck again.<br>
<br>
Inheritance regardless what form is never is the best
option here. I think "ancestor list" is just a misnomer in
the documentation as it cannot be a list but only one in
case of class helper.</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The control of modules order in uses section can turn
programmers life into real hell for type helpers. I think
that new directive $EXPLICITHELPERSÂ should help :</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
That's effectively just another way to write:<br>
<br>
TMyHelper = class helper (TH2, TH1) // scope for helpers limited to
TH2, TH1<br>
<br>
:P<br>
<br>
Ondrej
</body>
</html>