[fpc-pascal] private type and type compatibility

Martin lazarus at mfriebe.de
Thu Oct 31 16:14:13 CET 2013

On 31/10/2013 14:41, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> ...and this modification would only become relevant for new code, so 
> quite probably not worth the compiler extra code. Yes, I can 
> understand this too. But my question was not about changing the 
> behavior of fpc (not any more). This was a theoretical question. In 
> other words, if you had been in a position to create TP back in 
> nineteen something, and if one of your main concerns had been about 
> respecting the Pascal philosophy, how would you have handled this? The 
> way it has been done? Or do you agree this was not quite orthodox 
> (although efficient)?

Well, that depends on how you see a type.

If a type is something that I can use to declare a variable, then the 
"type-information" (for lack of another term) that is part of a typed 
variable is not a "type". Because I can not use it to declare a variable..

So if you differ between type, and type-information then there is no 

A typed variable has type info (never mind RTTI, it may just be avail at 
compile time). this type info can be accessed through the variable.

Also where is the problem with it?
By making a variable or function's result) public, you declare, that it 
should be usable. So you should expect all indirect requirements to be 
made available too.

More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list