[fpc-pascal] Documentation for sqldb - More Questions

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Tue, 3 Jul 2007, Martin Schreiber wrote:

> On Tuesday 03 July 2007 13.16, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-07-03 at 12:57 +0200, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> > > I'd rather see that the whole is coordinated a bit. I don't think all
> > > this
> > > duplication is a good idea; One solid set of components makes much
> > > more
> > > sense: the number of developers available for it's maintenance would
> > > double.
> > > The end user would also benefit, as we can give 1 solid set of
> > > components,
> > > no doubts possible.
> >
> > I aggree with Michael on this. Besides, last time I looked at your
> > 'TBufDataset' (which is a actually a fork, offcourse) it only
> > implemented blob-fields, on top of the existing TBufDataset.
> >
> > The current TBufDataset also supports blob-fields, in a (in my opinion)
> > better way, now. Are there any other changes/additions?
> >
> It is completely rewritten. Buffer organisation is not a linked list, the 
> record pointers are hold in arrays to allow simple record accessing by 
> locally builded indexes and easy recno handling. String fields are stored as 
> widestrings, there are no fixed string field sizes in the record buffer. 

Quick question, before I continue with the evaluation:

I find no evidence of this last thing in the code ? (in trunk, that is)
msbufdataset has fixed buffers for strings, and uses 1 byte per char.

Michael.