On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 23:55:31 +0200 (CEST) Daniël Mantione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Op Sat, 20 Oct 2007, schreef Mattias Gaertner: > > > And another: > > A lazarus built with fpc 2.0.4 should be able to read the ppu of > > 2.3.x. Even though the ppu format is very stable, it is not carved > > in stone. So, maybe it would be best to keep a working copy of the > > ppu reader unit in the lazarus svn and give it a distinct name? > > Only the global structure stays the same. Fields are being added and > removed from defs and syms all the time and compiler development > progresses. Then I vote for using a copy, which is manually updated from time to time. Coming back to the real problem: Searching and reading the ppu is as expensive as reading the sources or reading the fpdoc xml files. So, there is no need to put the property information into the ppu - except for closed sources. RTTI: The RTTI as storage has the advantage, that you don't need to explore the code. Comment/Pragma/IDE directive: Using a 'comment' has the disadvantage of expensive finding/reading the source and the advantage, that you don't need the ppu (easier cross exploring, more independent of missing units). Mattias _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
