[fpc-devel] Thoughts on being able to declare "pointer-to-type" parameters directly in method signatures?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Mon, 10 Jun 2019, Florian Klämpfl wrote:

> Am 10.06.2019 um 09:14 schrieb Michael Van Canneyt:
>> 
>> Now, there exists an exception to this rule, introduced by Borland: open array parameters.
>
> Well, open strings and open arrays cannot be considered as real types imo (you cannot declare anything else than a
> parameter as open array/string) but more a parameter passing convention similar to call by reference parameters which
> could also be considered as a type definition then (C++ has reference types after all).


The main thing is that there is a solid reason for the current behaviour, 
and better arguments than 'productivity' must be provided.

I'm not a big fan of generics, anonymous functions and many other recent
language additions, but at least those actually add new functionality to the
language.

Michael.