(PS: These comments are not specifically aimed at or about Danilo's code)
- He is redefining a constant in a procedure. I thought this would not be possible anymore?
- Given that COM could be used a lot, code would be much cleaner if the pointer "*" notation was dropped or, to pacify the hoards now gasping, it was made optional. Remember when considering this suggestion that for all other var types, the type can be defined and then effectively forgotton, ie, it's up to you as the programmer to remember what you are dealing with. The fact that a pointer var is followed by "\" should be enough to identify it (in most situations, eg, spot the redundancy in "*this_data\") and I would further suggest that "^" could be used (or anything else, I don't care) when referring to the pointer itself rather than what it points to. I feel crosshairs homing in on me
but please give it some serious thought because one of BASIC's strength's is it's readability.- If you are going to be sharing code (esp COM related) consider adopting one of the more common notations around. (again note this is a general comment, not a critiscism aimed at Danilo)
- "Partial Includes" anyone? Look at Danilo's sTEST2 structure. I think this is going to crop up frequently. It would be good to have something like "StructureInclude" (like "StructureUnion") to plug it in automatically. This idea maybe needs more thought but it at least could help keep things consistent if the "inherited" class (in the loosest sense) is modified. Your thoughts? Maybe this adds to the case for a flexible pre-compiler as discussed recently.
.
