[fpc-pascal]WoW

[Matt Emson]

> Matt, I really don't understand why FPC lessening the strictness of
Delphi's
> implementation of OOP is hurting anything.

Because no one uses the standard. If no one uses the standard, doesn't that
tell you something about the standard? I.e. undesirable. I used to program
in ADA, and to be honest it was a nightmare, mainly because some board
somewhere had sat down and designed it. It was all over the place IMHO.

> I mean, you can still declare
> fields before methods if you want, but it's not necessary.

Because Delphi is probably the most widely used Pascal compiler (Turbo
Pascal given) today.

> Maybe it would be a good idea to force this strictness in {$MODE DELPHI},
but I
> think it would be a bad idea to also force it in {$MODE OBJFPC}.

One of the major problems with FPC is that it tries to do too many things.
Too many cooks spoil the broth etc. If FPC focused on a standard (and the
Borland standard is one I would like to see aimed for, that's both Turbo and
Object Pascal) then the compiler would be stronger. Implementing standards
that no one uses is a waste of time and resources. Implementing additional
compatibility modes is not worthwhile. If we want to use GPC, we can
download it etc. Besides, surely the Extended Pascal standard would be a
better one to aim for.

The Object Pascal that Florian mentioned seems flakey and ugly to say the
least. I also don't believe that FPC even meets it half way. Its pointless
to implement half a standard.

> Also, I don't see the big problem with multiple inheritence and abstract
> classes.

LOL!!! Why do you need to mark a class as abstract? If you have one single
Abstract method in it, it in essence becomes an abstract class - that is to
say, you shouldn't be able to create an instance of it. This is the way that
both Delphi and Java do things, and it simplifies the language syntax
greatly. As for multiple inheritence - it's just plain evil. Why do so many
modern OO languages (Java, Delphi, VB.NET, C#, etc)  have only single
inheritence? The answer is that multiple inheritence breads inconsistency,
overcomplexity and down right stupidity in most programmers. Look at the
mess many get into in C++. In the field of OOPD, most of us feel nothing but
contempt for multiple inheritence.

> On a side note, GPC is supposedly going to implement OOP (the variety
> described in the working draft) and treat .pp files as Pascal sources.

GPC is next to useless in most normal ussage.

> But I've never tried GPC, primarily because it sounds like it would be
hard to
> get set up but also because I feel it's hypocrisy to make a Pascal
compiler
> with C.

Save yourself the bother ;-) Dont..

Matt