[fpc-pascal] Interface syntax: Is possible don't use specialize in mode objfpc?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Thu, 16 Jul 2015, silvioprog wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Michael Van Canneyt <michael at freepascal.org> wrote:
>       On Thu, 16 Jul 2015, Marcos Douglas wrote:
>             On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Michael Van Canneyt
>             <michael at freepascal.org> wrote:
> 
>
>                   On Thu, 16 Jul 2015, Maciej Izak wrote:
>
>                         sadly - no, only in Delphi mode. btw. this thing keep me away from objfpc.
> 
> 
>
>                   That seems like a very strange reason to me.
>
>                   The fact that you must type 1 word in certain places keeps you from using an
>                   otherwise useful mode ?
>                   This word is there for clarity, It is meant to help you, to make explicit
>                   you are in fact specializing a new type.
> 
>
>             Yes, but do you think this is more verbose unnecessarily? Because the
>             syntax TFoo<T> (I mean this "<>") show us that is a generic, don't?
>
>             The Lazarus also has some troubles with the code completion using this:
>             TFoo = class(TInterfacedObject, specialize ICloneable<TFoo>)
> 
>
>       Lazarus is not alone, even I have trouble with this :)
> 
>
>             Sometimes the IDE shows an error in interface declaration, but compiles.
>             So, to not receive these errors I have to create a new type:
>
>             TFoo = class; //forward
>
>             IFooCloneable = specialize ICloneable<TFoo>;
>
>             TFoo = class(TInterfacedObject, IFooCloneable)
>             //...
>             end;
>             ...making even more verbose.
> 
>
>       Pascal is a verbose language. If you want terse, use C++ or something like it.
>
>       The whole generics mess that Delphi made goes completely against the Pascal dictum that you must declare something before you can use it.
>
>       To me, the above verbose construction makes absolute sense. It has been so since day 1:
>
>       PRecord = ^TRecord;
>       TRecord = record
>         a : integer;
>         next : PRecord;
>       end;
>
>       Michael.
> 
> 
> IMHO this could be decided via poll, because several users around the world are using FPC too. For example, in a polling, I would vote in less keywords, e.g: [+1 vote for: "TFoo =
> class(TInterfacedObject, ICloneable<TFoo>)" / "t.Add<LongInt>(2, 4);"] and [-1 vote for: "TFoo = class(TInterfacedObject, specialize ICloneable<TFoo>)" / "t.specialize Add<LongInt>(2, 4);"].
> 
> The more verbose a language becomes, and needs more keywords to do simple things, the more chances it has to be depreciated.

You better wake up, pascal is long deprecated.

> 
> I use other languages too, like Java (Android) and JS (front-end / AngularJS), but here in our company we are testing and thinking about migrating a lot of our online structure to Node.js, because
> it is very productive and less burocratic. For while we are using a mix of Pascal (XE8/FPC 3) and Node.js via proxy + websocket, but the trend is to use only JS in front-end and back-end.

And you honestly think that this change will stop this process ?

People that feel that this is a problem can use mode Delphi.

Michael.