In our previous episode, Ludo Brands said: > > that is increasingly happening, with the first D7 supports > > disappearing) > > > The underlying problem is that the Delphi Tbookmark definition migrated from > the simple record tag to something that holds (or can hold) the state of the > record.
A reason the more to not rely on implementation details, but treat it as an opague type as much as possible. > > But note that changing it to tbytes IMHO doesn't mean you can > > skip freebookmark, if you do that you cut corners, and > > program for a specific tdataset > > OK. I understand your point. But now that the dataset implementers, who > follow 2.7.1 as you indicated, have added freebookmark to their code, can we > move on the next phase: tbytes? > No need to linger on TBookmark=pointer. Well, are you sure that the whole FPC+Lazarus codebases properly use freebookmark everywhere? Kidding, I never expected this much drama. If it is such big deal, and since we all agree over the eventual (tbytes) outcode let's just fix it. Make a patch, but do it in a way that keeps the current behaviour under (not active) ifdef if possible (nonautomatedbookmark or so). That way if we want to cleanup/detect missing freebookmarks, we only have to define that. That was probably the whole intended purpose of the exercise anyway. (and I do encourage people to test their code with that setting) > If creating the patch is the issue, I'm volunteering ;) You can do it, if not, I will in the coming days. _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
