On 7-2-2012 18:34, Jürgen Hestermann wrote: > Reinier Olislagers schrieb: >> That's fine. If you just say "anything gets expanded to an absolute >> path", in my mind: >> 1. you're implying the thing you're expanding is relative (even if >> you're not saying so) > > No, IMO this is not true. A relative path...
Yes, it IS true ;) I'm talking about what it implies to ME (and possibly other people)... Fortunately below we agree on assumptions ;) >> 2. you're leaving users to guess what "expanded" means exactly. From >> relative to absolute? What placeholders get "expanded", if any, etc. > True. It is assumed that users know about relative and absolute paths > and existing placeholders. Of course, there is no harm to add more > explanations but someone has to do so and time is limited. Agreed about resources. Might help if fpdoc and/or lazde did not totally screw up the XML so sending a diff is impossible. Ah well... No sense beating dead horses/going over things that already have been discussed in the list. >> Might be that I'm just too stupid sometimes, but if we can help the >> stupid users too, why not ;) > > Agree. Too much information is better then too little information. > Assumption are often wrong. I was expecting environment variables too be > expanded but it seems they are not ;-) ACK ;) _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
