<div dir="auto"><div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">fredvs <<a href="mailto:fiens@hotmail.com">fiens@hotmail.com</a>> schrieb am Mi., 9. Okt. 2019, 12:00:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Could it be possible to simplify the life of rtl-users and add methods with<br>
same parameters as previous version and make it compatible with new<br>
features?<br></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Working with the RTTI simply is *not* simple, because you're interfacing with binary data that is represented by Pascal records. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Other wishes:<br>
<br>
It seems that the updates done to rtl were necessary because of some<br>
arm-compatibility.<br>
<br>
OK, but now, for the same code, the binary-result compiled program is +- 30<br>
% bigger that same code compiled with fpc 3.0.4 or fp 3.2.0 (on the<br>
contrary fpc 3.2.0 gives binary 10 % less big than with fpc 3.0.4).<br>
<br>
Would it not be better to play with "{$ifdef cpuarm}" and so not make things<br>
heavier for all others cpu that do not need those arm-extension?<br></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This size increase is not ARM related, but related to a new feature.</div><div dir="auto">The alignment fixes you mention are in fact necessary for all non-x86 targets. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Regards, </div><div dir="auto">Sven </div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
</blockquote></div></div></div>