[fpc-devel] Re: [fpc-pascal] Should TObject or TComponent have a Comment property?

vfclists . vfclists at gmail.com
Fri Jul 12 09:48:54 CEST 2013

On 12 July 2013 08:18, Michael Van Canneyt <michael at freepascal.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 11 Jul 2013, vfclists . wrote:
>  Should TObject or TComponent have a Comment property?
>> I think they should. One for the design itself and one for describing the
>> usage at design or runtime.
> No. It takes memory and needs management. Putting this in a basic class
> such as TComponent is not an option.
> Your suggestion to 'not store it in the final executable' is not even
> remotely possible.
> You can put a comment in front of the object or any of its properties, and
> the lazarus IDE will display this comment for you.
> It does not take memory, and performs the same function. The only reason
> the smalltalk people didn't take that approach, I suppose, is because they
> don't have an intelligent IDE.
LOL. The Smalltalk IDE "IS" the original IDE and over 30 years later it is
yet to be matched for functionality and practicality.

This comment issue is like approaching a person on the street and asking
him "What is your occupation?" -  and he doesn't can't tell you. You can
only look at his name badge if he is wearing one, and find out from some
authority who he might be, assuming you know who and where to ask.

> Michael.
> ______________________________**_________________
> fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel at lists.freepascal.org
> http://lists.freepascal.org/**mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel<http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel>

Frank Church

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freepascal.org/pipermail/fpc-devel/attachments/20130712/cc2e4af8/attachment.html>

More information about the fpc-devel mailing list