[fpc-pascal] Bug in enumerators 2.6.4

[Torsten Bonde Christiansen]

On 2014-03-24 10:57, Marco van de Voort wrote:
> In our previous episode, Torsten Bonde Christiansen said:
>> Yes. A case where a check is missing doesn't automatically mean a 
>> feature has been implemented where that check is not needed. 
>> Overriding methods with declarations that don't match the original is 
>> a big thing.

Crap... this means I have to redo some of my code. ;)

-Torsten.