With haters unite

[Tommi Prami 130]

With haters unite, please vote for this :

 

https://quality.embarcadero.com/browse/RSP-18953

 

Compiler (etc) assisted with removal Refactoring tool would be super cool.

 

Sometimes so error prone to remove by hand, especially nested withs.

 

(oops wrong link at start)

Edited February 6, 2020 by Tommi Prami

[Uwe Raabe 2057]

The filter "Reported by me" yields different results for everyone - obviously.

[Tommi Prami 130]

Maybe now...

[Sherlock 663]

I see issue 21814...I see no with. Both eyes open...Brain perhaps not at 100% though.

[Lars Fosdal 1792]

Did you mean https://quality.embarcadero.com/browse/RSP-18953 - Tommi?

 

21814 is the Windows 10 Ansi/UTF-8 QP - which, by the way, returns different values on my Windows 10 Enterprise 1809  10.0.17763.831, depending on which PowerShell version you use.

 

PowerShell 5.1
IsSingleByte      : True
BodyName          : iso-8859-1
EncodingName      : Western European (Windows)
HeaderName        : Windows-1252
WebName           : Windows-1252
WindowsCodePage   : 1252
IsBrowserDisplay  : True
IsBrowserSave     : True
IsMailNewsDisplay : True
IsMailNewsSave    : True
EncoderFallback   : System.Text.InternalEncoderBestFitFallback
DecoderFallback   : System.Text.InternalDecoderBestFitFallback
IsReadOnly        : True
CodePage          : 1252

PowerShell 6.2.4
Preamble          :
BodyName          : utf-8
EncodingName      : Unicode (UTF-8)
HeaderName        : utf-8
WebName           : utf-8
WindowsCodePage   : 1200
IsBrowserDisplay  : True
IsBrowserSave     : True
IsMailNewsDisplay : True
IsMailNewsSave    : True
IsSingleByte      : False
EncoderFallback   : System.Text.EncoderReplacementFallback
DecoderFallback   : System.Text.DecoderReplacementFallback
IsReadOnly        : True
CodePage          : 65001

 

[Lars Fosdal 1792]

I'd like this to be possible, and a compiler switch that bans the old with statements.

with var ref := Some.Array[Index1].Reference, var thing := Function(Index1).Thing
do begin
  if ref.Value <> thing.Value
  then begin
    ...
  end;
end;
// ref and thing are not present

 

[Tommi Prami 130]

Damnation, right. This is correct URL: https://quality.embarcadero.com/browse/RSP-18953

 

Thanks... Copy paste errors all day 😄

 

-tee-

[Tommi Prami 130]

Sorry about all link hassle.. 

 

-tee- 

[Wagner Landgraf 43]

2 hours ago, Lars Fosdal said:

I'd like this to be possible, and a compiler switch that bans the old with statements.

with var ref := Some.Array[Index1].Reference, var thing := Function(Index1).Thing
do begin
  if ref.Value <> thing.Value
  then begin
    ...
  end;
end;
// ref and thing are not present

 

It is, it's called inline variables... 😉

 

[Lars Fosdal 1792]

16 minutes ago, Wagner Landgraf said:

It is, it's called inline variables... 😉

 

True, but the point is a more natural limit of variable scope.

var ref := Some.Array[Index1].Reference;
var thing := Function(Index1).Thing;
if ref.Value <> thing.Value
then begin
  ...
end;
// ref and thing ARE present here

I guess you could wrap it in another pair of begin/end - but that would look a bit strange, while the with signals clearly that these are local.

[Anders Melander 1783]

7 minutes ago, Lars Fosdal said:

I guess you could wrap it in another pair of begin/end - but that would look a bit strange, while the with signals clearly that these are local.

You already have a begin...end pair:

with whatever do
begin
end;

So why not just move the inline inside the begin...end and get rid of the with:

begin
  var thisorthat := whatever;
  ...
end;

I see no reason to change the language so we can keep using with. Just get rid of it and forget it ever existed.

[Uwe Raabe 2057]

Indeed! You would write it this way:

begin
  ...
  begin  // do something with ref and thing 
    var ref := Some.Array[Index1].Reference;
    var thing := Function(Index1).Thing
    if ref.Value <> thing.Value
    then begin
      ...
    end;
  end;
  // ref and thing are not present
  ...
end;

 

Edited February 6, 2020 by Uwe Raabe