bartek wrote: > I am not quite sure whether my synatx is correct. IMHO explictly defining the > type feels more pascalish. Having more time at hand i have written a much > shorter example code which shows in what way such a type should be defined.
I think that it is the same type in a different namespace. Like using "unit.type" syntax. Micha _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
