[fpc-devel] Breaking change in FPC 2.6.1
Marco van de Voort
marcov at stack.nl
Wed Apr 25 15:17:06 CEST 2012
In our previous episode, Ludo Brands said:
> > that is increasingly happening, with the first D7 supports
> > disappearing)
> The underlying problem is that the Delphi Tbookmark definition migrated from
> the simple record tag to something that holds (or can hold) the state of the
A reason the more to not rely on implementation details, but treat it as an
opague type as much as possible.
> > But note that changing it to tbytes IMHO doesn't mean you can
> > skip freebookmark, if you do that you cut corners, and
> > program for a specific tdataset
> OK. I understand your point. But now that the dataset implementers, who
> follow 2.7.1 as you indicated, have added freebookmark to their code, can we
> move on the next phase: tbytes?
> No need to linger on TBookmark=pointer.
Well, are you sure that the whole FPC+Lazarus codebases properly use
Kidding, I never expected this much drama. If it is such big deal, and since
we all agree over the eventual (tbytes) outcode let's just fix it. Make a
patch, but do it in a way that keeps the current behaviour under (not
active) ifdef if possible (nonautomatedbookmark or so). That way if we want
to cleanup/detect missing freebookmarks, we only have to define that. That
was probably the whole intended purpose of the exercise anyway. (and I do
encourage people to test their code with that setting)
> If creating the patch is the issue, I'm volunteering ;)
You can do it, if not, I will in the coming days.
More information about the fpc-devel