[fpc-devel] Some thoughts on multi-line string support, and a possible syntax that I think is perfectly clean and Pascal-ish.

[Marco van de Voort]

Op 2019-07-04 om 15:12 schreef Ben Grasset:
> On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 6:01 AM Marco van de Voort 
> <fpc at pascalprogramming.org <mailto:fpc at pascalprogramming.org>> wrote:
>
>     - Basically a shorthand, the solution with + works fine. There also
>     could be $includefileasstring or something, one of the few
>     extensions in
>     recent years that I have been in favor of.
>
>     In conclusion:  it is a solution in search of a problem, with bad
>     behaviour in errorhandling (when unbalanced the compiler errors on
>     perfectly fine code in the wrong place after whatever ' closes the
>     unbalanced ) on top of it.
>
>
> The solution with + does NOT work fine for non-trivial things

Increasingly unlikely.

> and becomes extremely unwieldy,

Yes. Many things driven to extremes are. But the solution is not always 
to push for a language feature.

E.g. where in this very long thread do the proponents actually balance 
the need for a language feature against an IDE feature (to decode a  
multiline string in + form into a popup, let user perform edit, and then 
+ it again).

Where did the _proponents_ consider downsides as behaviour with 
unbalanced strings?

Nowhere. It is all about bullying the feature in. "need" + "some other 
language has it" -> "language feature" must happen. Shortest route, no 
detractions or other opinions please!

> as many people have clearly expressed, nor is the feature "a solution 
> in search of a problem."

And as many have said they don't see it.

>
> Do you think I would have made this post, and then *literally 
> implemented a basic working version of it myself* if I did not want to 
> specifically use it?

I don't know what you are thinking.  But as usual in such discussions, 
the necessity of the features is heavily inflated just to make a case. I 
don't buy that.

It's rare, create IDE extensions to do the +ing for you, there are 
multiple ways.

For some reasons you 100% want to have this language feature and will 
make the earth rotate around that fact if necessary. I'm not buying it.

>
> No, of course not. This condescending "I know better than you what 
> your use cases are" attitude people keep expressing in this email 
> chain is rather distasteful, IMO.
>
It is actually friendliness, trying to explain rather than a cold "NO". 
But the whole thing is so irrational and polarized that this is seen as 
condescending, apparently.