No. Don't chase the sugar syntax at all. Don't chase java, javascript or C#.
I'm even don't thinking about it, I promise. And I don't want Pascal to looks like Java or something else. I'm only want for to syntax of Pascal stay looks clean and human-friendly. And also follow the principle - don't produce redundant essence(but it wish closer to topic about overloaded properties).
Maybe you also hint me that I construct bad classes hierarchy(because if don't - so in fact you say - you task can be done only with code, that makes my eyes bleeding
). And maybe - you right, To know it for sure, let me explain. In fact I try to build dynamic array of structures:
TMyItem=record
Data:string;
Checked:boolean;
Founded:boolean;
end;
TListMyItem=class
property Items[AIndex:integer]:TMyItem read GetMyItem;
end;
L:TListMyItem;
// and now correct:
L.Items[0].Data:='str';
L.Items[0].Checked:=True;
// but I wand have ability to write:
L.Items[0]:='str';
L.Items[0].Checked:=True;
This effect can be reached if only records support 'default', but it's not support. If I'm write:
TMyItem=record
Data:string;default;
Checked:boolean;
Founded:boolean;
end;
I've got error. Also if I go this way - I need to do all from scratch without using of already complete classes like TStringList and TBoolList.