[fpc-pascal] Uniform initialization?
pascaldragon at googlemail.com
Sun Nov 11 22:15:05 CET 2018
Am 11.11.2018 um 19:29 schrieb leledumbo via fpc-pascal:
>> But *if* I had to decide I would pick #1, cause then there wouldn't be
>> the chance to break existing code if a user decides to add a constructor
>> to their record and some other code relies on there not being a
>> constructor. Also due to the syntax
>> TYPENAME(FIELDNAME:VALUE[;FIELDNAME:VALUE[;…]]) it's in principle
>> possible to have the parser distinguish whether it's a typecast or a
>> default constructor.
> I would pick #1, too, seems more natural to me. There's no ambiguity as well
> thanks to : in the syntax. I do wonder how often this would be used, though.
> Despite being idiomatic in many languages, it doesn't really save much
> typing that traditional way (if that's the main purpose).
Especially if you're using the same initialization values more often
you'd safe more time by declaring a suitable constant and using that as
the IDE can help you with code completion when using the constant.
More information about the fpc-pascal