[fpc-devel] Re: Class field reordering

Marco van de Voort marcov at stack.nl
Sun Jul 22 11:55:07 CEST 2012

In our previous episode, Martin Schreiber said:
> > >> Martin needs the crackers for some mse* features.
> > That's because you don't just ask for changes.
> > You ask for your own solutions to be implemented in FPC.
> >
> I do not ask for my own solutions, I ask to move private FPC class fields and 
> methods of base classes which are used in different toolkits to protected in 
> order to make them more flexible without changing any functionality and 
> because the current workaround with cracker classes may be not possible 
> anymore in future because of upcoming FPC optimisations.

I don't like this as a blanket solution. Individual cases can be discussed,
making it a principle means that we have to support even more of the
interface (everything that can be reach by hacking the implementation of the
> > You must give detailed descriptions of what you think is a problem,
> > and be prepared to accept solutions that are maybe not 100% to your liking.
> >
> > If you are not prepared to accept such solutions, then I cannot help you.
> >
> Sorry Michael, I do not trust that the effort is worth the outcome for me.

Then IMHO you are on your own in finding solutions. We can be reasoned with,
but if people don't bother, there is nothing we can do.

More information about the fpc-devel mailing list