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

silvioprog silvioprog at gmail.com
Thu Jul 30 16:37:54 CEST 2015


On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 4:10 AM, Michael Van Canneyt <michael at freepascal.org
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 24 Jul 2015, silvioprog wrote:
>>
>> After that, we can still see about new modes. I'm not arguing about that.
>>>
>>> Michael.
>>>
>>
>> Are you talking about compatibility to Delphi 5/7?
>>
>> There are already many new great components available on network, however
>> it uses some basic new Delphi features like I said above, but
>> unfortunatelly FPC doesn't compile them.
>>
>
> I am not against improving Delphi compatibility, I have never said that.
>
> But for me, people should use the correct arguments:
> - improved productivity is not one of them. I see no proof of this.
>   I do see a lot of marketing.
> - The word "Modern" is very subjective.
>
> In short, it isn't a problem to me and I'm glad to use ObjFPC even with
>> some limitations, but I would be very greatful if the ObjFPC could be
>> improved using at least generics, new RTTI and custom attributes.
>>
>
> Attributes and RTTI will come as soon as 3.0 are out of the door.
>

Wow, this is a great new! =)


> In the meanwhile, why don't you just use mode Delphi and enjoy the
> benefits of that mode ?


I'm using mode delphi in some units, however just for retro compatibility.

I know it would be a hard work to be able in FPC, but I can see a bit
>> resistance from
>> the FPC core to accept this new features (or nonsense, as they use to say
>> =D ).
>>
>
> I didn't say features are nonsense. I said arguments are nonsense.
>
> [1] https://github.com/hprose/hprose-delphi
>> [2] https://www.devart.com/entitydac/
>> [3] https://www.tmssoftware.com/site/aurelius.asp
>>
>
> hprose works in lazarus if I understand the sources correctly.
>

It works, but skipping many features using something like {IFNDEF FPC}'many
features'{ELSE}'nothing'.


> From the entitydac site:
> "I originally purchased TMS Aurelius (ORM). I could not get it off the
> ground after three days."
>
> So be careful what you pick as examples ;)
>

At the same page:

"This is "THE ORM FOR DELPHI". Easy to use and powerful. With this tool I
have simplified the DB managing in my Delphi application and I can create
true cross-db application using EntityDAC and UNIDAC, two great products."


> Additionally:
> If you had used tiOPF 10 years ago, you could have done exactly the same
> as what these products (entitydac and aurelius) do, at NO cost, and without
> generics. I can say this with confidence, because I already did that, and
> still do today.
>
> But once more, it's just about arguments. Not about stopping people.
>
> Michael.


Yes, I took a look at tiOPF some years ago, it is a nice framework, but it
doesn't imply me not to meet new frameworks. =)

Although, this is just my opinion, because I think that this
details/features could help the FPC users to use more third party
components.

-- 
Silvio Cl├ęcio
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freepascal.org/pipermail/fpc-pascal/attachments/20150730/d0669907/attachment.html>


More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list