[fpc-devel] Unicode proceedings

[Sven Barth]

Am 16.11.2011 10:44, schrieb Marco van de Voort:
> In our previous episode, Sven Barth said:
>> On 15.11.2011 12:41, Michael Schnell wrote:
>>> While neither A nor B is Delphi XE compatible in any way, C seems a bit
>>> similar to what Emb does. But AFAIK, Delphi does not provide an
>>> unambiguous, well defined and understandable paradigm (such as a
>>> Object-like Parent/Child relationship) for the features of the different
>>> string types. So the FPC team should be free do do a decent definition.
>>
>> Huh? As far as I understand it B is the closest to Delphi's and current
>> trunk's implementation.
>
> It's a mix of all three actually. It is typed(A), there are two (B)
> implementations, and the memory layout of both implementations have
> similarities that makes Rawbytestring possible, making rawbytestring the
> base memory representation the others "inherit" from (C).
>
> Finding (C) is a bit of a stretch though. A and B are way more true than C.
>
> A is from the type system view. B is from the implementation (runtime
> helpers) view. C only for rawbytestring (which is very, very limited and way
> overestimated in all these discussions)

In that case it seems that I have a very implementation centric point of 
view :P

Regards,
Sven