[fpc-pascal] why can't we define class operator for old fashion object type, but ok for 'advanced record' type?

Sven Barth pascaldragon at googlemail.com
Wed Aug 15 13:47:15 CEST 2018

Previous message (by thread): [fpc-pascal] why can't we define class operator for old fashion object type, but ok for 'advanced record' type?
Next message (by thread): [fpc-pascal] why can't we define class operator for old fashion object type, but ok for 'advanced record' type?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Am 15.08.2018 um 10:59 schrieb Dennis:
> Why class operator is accepted for advanced records but not old 
> fashion object???
Because objects are not records. Internally they are handled more 
closely to classes than records.

Regards,
Sven

Previous message (by thread): [fpc-pascal] why can't we define class operator for old fashion object type, but ok for 'advanced record' type?
Next message (by thread): [fpc-pascal] why can't we define class operator for old fashion object type, but ok for 'advanced record' type?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list