[fpc-devel]Re: fpc-devel digest, Vol 1 #1035 - 2 msgs

[Peter Vreman]

> >> What is the mean, to keep unused BP-objects methods in .exe although 
> old objects are not
>fdadetn> designed for RTTI?
> >> Or FPC does support RTTI for these objects? Then, IMHO, it is a 
> unnecessary feature
>fdadetn> because then old-style
> >> objects will be useless (but in Borland products they are useful 
> because allow to write
>fdadetn> compact high-optimized
> >> applications; a good demonstration is KOL - free Key Object Library 
> for Delphi).
>
>fdadetn> The VMT of t2 contains a reference to the VMT of t1. And that one 
>contains a reference to
>fdadetn> t1.Test.
>
>fdadetn> I don't know an easy solution to remove this kind of unused code. 
>And IMHO it has a very
>fdadetn> low priority to be solved.
>And why not to add RTTI to standart objects ? (or function, to let
>just know the exact object type by pointer to it ?)

That will only generate more data. And the question was to reduce the 
amount of data.

But why do you need RTTI for objects? standard objects are available for 
backwards compatibility. All the new things like properties, interfaces are 
only for classes.


Peter