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

[Joost van der Sluis]

On Wed, 2010-05-19 at 19:52 +0200, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> On 19 May 2010 19:24, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> >
> > that I actually need and why I implemented observer in the first place: to
> > be able to observe for instance the changes in TMemo.Lines or
> > TCombobox.Items. (and these are from real-world examples).
> 
> And my prototype implementation of TActions support in fpGUI using
> Observer is another example. I totally eliminated the TBasicActionLink
> class hierarchy yet have the same functionality as LCL/VCL Actions
> with less (and clearer) code.

This is what Marco is afraid about: that people want to alter the
base-design, because 'their design is better'. That's certainly not what
we should do. But adding the observer-possibility to the base classes is
ok with me. It doesn't change the design, it adds something to it.
something that I would implement the same way if I would re-design it.

> > No-one objected then, I see no reason why this minor change is
> > so questionable.
> 
> I think Marco makes it his mission in life to disagree with everything
> I say.  :-(

Trolling again? (It's not less a troll if there's a smiley behind it.
Again an useless remark, only to grieve some others)

Joost.