[fpc-devel] Interface delegation fix: backport to FPC 2.4.2 ...?

[Helmut Hartl]

Am 20.05.10 01:27, schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
> On 20/05/2010, Marco van de Voort<marcov at stack.nl>  wrote:
>    
>> Yeah. Studying means neither.
>>      
> Well lets see: I have written numerous technical papers/articles on
> the subject, been using it in commercial software for almost 10 years
> and presented technical and training workshops on the subject. I think
> I have a good knowledge on the subject.
>
>    
>>   And while Michael advocates he has thought long about it, so have I. We even
>>   discussed about TStringlist and the sad way it plugs into the VCL/LCL in the
>>   car for at leat more than an hour when we drove to Muenchen the last time.
>>      
> Code evolves over time - that's a fact. Refactoring code is also a way
> of life (or at least should be) for developers. The only constant in
> code is change! Introducing Observer into the classes unit is simply
> code evolving - fulfilling a new software requirement that did not
> exist before

*EXPLICIT WARNING : "ACADEMIC VIEWPOINT"*
  (this means worthless in practice :-)) (or I have read many books,
  understood something and I am able to impress
people with wrong mathematical proofs)

Be prepared to laugh - or think about your sense of humor.

Life flows - evolution is good (at least for they who are on the winning 
side),
reading books opens the mind (alcohol too - but little (own) childs the 
most).
Patterns are super -  but not if you are coding something performance 
critical.
Extra stuff that makes things easier is nice - I always want my VAN to 
be a Truck
when I am transporting something AND to be a bicycle when searching for a
parking lot.

While coding OpenGL/Physics I would like to hang everybody polluting the 
base,
while coding our boring business stuff  multitier bloatet database 
applications
I would like the observer. (We did databases long enough now and 
switched to
something more fun)

Now I contributed a whole bunch of unrelated feelings based stuff to 
this discussion,
trying to match the argumentative style so far. :-)

Isn't it better to to ask the right questions (at least some) before 
trying to swing opinions
(with brutal - but - wrong directed force) ?

1) Who decides what comes into the base ?
2) What If I am not able to respect this descision ?
3) Do I really need that red car toy on every case ? (eeh.. skip this)
4)  Is there a summary of the discussion that cares about more sides of 
the problem ?
   a) Performance Point ?
   b) Memory Usage point ?
   c) Embedded Usage ?
   d) Crossplatform Usage ?
   e) Compatibility ?
5) When is the RIGHT TIME to do that discussion ? (I certainly doubt 
that it is now, 2.4.2)
     [To understand point 5 fully it may be good to be older than 25 
years ;-)]
6) Am I speaking for my personal pleasure or am I able to consider the 
points mentioned under 4 ?
7) Is it good to (often) block people who want to achieve something ?
8) Is there a solution who satisfies all parties to a certain degree or 
are we really to dumb to find it ?
9) How to make such a change at the right time, and give more people the 
ability to think about it
     - or give them the time to not think - not test and live with the 
consequences ?

The result should be a summary with pro's and con's and the ability to 
take a proper and thought
through decision.
(Maybe a wiki page with a summary table and the ability to vote ?
- If this would be a "democratic discussion" of course (see point 1) -

Rather than "Who has the longest ?"

  (Expierience in reading, talking, teaching of course
- please forgive my english - I am not a native ;-)
  It should have read "... rather than who has the most "... ?)

Helmut