From: Alexander K. <kw...@ah...> - 2008-11-15 16:53:29
|
Helmut Brandl wrote: > If you can declare ?INTEGER it must be possible to assign Void to that > entity. Otherwise it would not be detachable. On the other hand, expanded types are attached, so one interpretation is to consider them as being such regardless of an attachment mark. > This does not convince me. b:=a should attach b to the same object as a. > I don't see any bad consequences because of this, but a better > performance. Do you see any bad consequences? If yes, can you give an > example? If the class is designed in a way that prevents sharing objects of its type, why do we have to allow it? Air pressure is not shared among vehicle tires. Allowing to share it would lead to a strange consequence that changing it in one wheel causes the change in the others. Regards, Alexander Kogtenkov |