[fpc-devel] Addtions for strutils

ik idokan at gmail.com
Sun Jan 22 12:25:05 CET 2006

On 1/22/06, Jonas Maebe <jonas.maebe at elis.ugent.be> wrote:
> On 22 Jan 2006, at 11:24, ik wrote:
> >> val(x,code);
> >> result:=(code=0)  and (posexset(['+','-'],x)=0)
> >>
> >> would already do. (untested from memory)
> >
> > And why is that better ?
> Because it reuses existing code (although the above could even be
> made shorter by using TryStrToInt or so). Reusing existing code is
> pretty much always better, because it improves maintainability,
> reduces the chance to bugs and keeps the code size smaller.

But wouldn't a too large "number" such as
123456789012345678901234567890 would failed when using with
TryStrToInt, and will work on a loop based checking for number
characters ?

And what if the string is empty ? There are so many ways to make it to
fail, while actually try to see if the chars exists will not. If you
really want a speed, while not to use regex and check something like
^\d+$ and get over with it ? You assuming that the only input you are
getting will be a number or a char that is not a number.

Do you have any other basic ways to make it "maintainable" and fast
that can also support large amount of characters ?

> > I do a loop and see if I only have the valid
> > chars or stop. What happen if I have a number with 20 or 50 chars
> > based ? I only want to check if it contains a valid number chars, not
> > to actually convert it to anything (no one promise you that you can
> > convert it to any existed type!).
> I really don't think this is something which is needed in an rtl unit.

I think that we should have some type of a large group of useful units
on FPC that come with the "compiler" like Sun does with Java. It might
go to contrib etc... I just thought that strutils is a good place for

> Jonas


More information about the fpc-devel mailing list