On 14 May 2010 16:41, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > I can send you my 49 smaller patches. But I doubt that would help.
Personally, I would have preferred that because it's easier to debug a problem afterwards when things doesn't work. You have smaller commits to work through. Having a 150K patch means I (and probably others that didn't work on that patch) have no clue where to start looking for the problem. > AFAIK deprecated and label were not supported, so I did not break > that. The tiOPF code I tried to document with fpdoc did NOT fail with the 'label' or 'xxx of byte' syntax. Only after your commit did the errors of that syntax appear. That is why I split the bug report in two. The 'deprecated' issues was always there, but the others wasn't. I wasn't trying to be rude and point blame (I had a wink in my earlier reply). I'm simply stating that two syntax bugs slipped though your testing (obviously because those syntax wasn't used in FCL. But they are bugs because they worked before. -- Regards, - Graeme - _______________________________________________ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - [email protected] http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
