[fpc-devel] property syntax extension

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Sun, 21 Oct 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 01:43:51 +0200 (CEST)
> Michael Van Canneyt <michael at freepascal.org> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > On Sun, 21 Oct 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 00:46:19 +0200 (CEST)
> > > Michael Van Canneyt <michael at freepascal.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:29:40 +0200
> > > > > "Tomas Hajny" <XHajT03 at mbox.vol.cz> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > On 19 Oct 07, at 13:14, Micha Nelissen wrote:
> > > > > > > Jonas Maebe wrote:
> > > > > > > > This is not true. You can perfectly compile a compiler
> > > > > > > > using the previous' release rtl. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Sure this is not the question.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > E.g. the people developing using the fp IDE often 
> > > > > > > > do this (because they have a project for the compiler, but
> > > > > > > > that one does not automatically compile the rtl). 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Adapt the project to use the new RTL ? Anyway, seems
> > > > > > > "dangerous" to me, not testing possible RTL regressions
> > > > > > > then.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > A while ago, Peter removed several 
> > > > > > > > dependencies of the compiler on the new rtl (related to
> > > > > > > > endian swapping routines) for this reason.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I see the reason is not really coming out, but I'll stop
> > > > > > > now.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Well, I'd certainly have one (more) reason not to 
> > > > > > put it into RTL - I don't think that support for 
> > > > > > .ppu file format is something so general and 
> > > > > > commonly used by (Free) Pascal programmers that 
> > > > > > it should become part of our RTL.
> > > > > 
> > > > > And another:
> > > > > A lazarus built with fpc 2.0.4 should be able to read the ppu of
> > > > > 2.3.x. Even though the ppu format is very stable, it is not
> > > > > carved in stone.
> > > > 
> > > > It's built so that a newer version can always read an older PPU
> > > > file and vice versa: an old ppu unit can read a newer file, but
> > > > just doesn't know how to interpret certain blocks.
> > > 
> > > Are we talking about a complete ppu parser or something to only read
> > > the property info?
> > 
> > Well, the ppu file is divided in blocks; Each block has a type and a 
> > size. If you don't "know" a block, you can 'skip' it.
> > (If memory serves me right, of course)
> 
> If the codetools can only read those fields of the ppu, that are
> supported by the fpc version used for building the codetools, then the
> ppu reader will always stay merely a fallback parser - only used if
> there are no sources or to check the user configuration.
> 
> In this case: The property information can not be read with the
> released fpc 2.2. And this means probably the next years.
> 
> IMHO the codetools should be able to read the ppu of all available fpc
> versions, independent of the fpc used compiling the codetools.

I understand, but what do you want to say with this ?

Michael.