[fpc-pascal] Re: HMAC_SHA1 and FPC

Reinier Olislagers reinierolislagers at gmail.com
Tue Apr 2 10:11:28 CEST 2013

On 2-4-2013 10:04, Noah Silva wrote:
> 2013/4/2 Reinier Olislagers <reinierolislagers at gmail.com
> <mailto:reinierolislagers at gmail.com>>
>     If you feel so strongly about it, why not submit a patch that uses
>     OpenSSL on platforms that are sure to have it and use Silvio's native
>     code for others?
> Haha I was just mentioning one positive benefit.  Also, I am pretty sure
> Synapse can use the OpenSSL DLLs.


> I am much more likely to submit some patches to the OS X GUI for Lazarus
> that I have been fixing in the last week or so.  We'll see.

That does seem like a more worthwhile area, yes....
> Thank you,
>     Noah Silva

No worries,

> p.s.: I don't see a big deal in pulling in something like Synapse so
> long as it compiles easily for your platform.  You don't have to use all
> the units, and the linker shouldn't even include all of the code from
> the units you do use.  If you only use one function that is mostly
> contained (like HMAC), then it shouldn't add much to your program's size
> in the scheme of things.  I don't like when people use things that
> aren't really needed mainly because you have to then download them and
> pray they compile on your setup.  (And in some cases, recompile
> Lazarus!).  For more common things that "just work", I have no issue.

Agreed - Synapse is nicely self-contained and modular.

More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list