On 2-4-2013 10:04, Noah Silva wrote: > 2013/4/2 Reinier Olislagers <reinierolislag...@gmail.com > <mailto:reinierolislag...@gmail.com>> > If you feel so strongly about it, why not submit a patch that uses > OpenSSL on platforms that are sure to have it and use Silvio's native > code for others? > > > Haha I was just mentioning one positive benefit. Also, I am pretty sure > Synapse can use the OpenSSL DLLs.
Yep. > I am much more likely to submit some patches to the OS X GUI for Lazarus > that I have been fixing in the last week or so. We'll see. That does seem like a more worthwhile area, yes.... > > Thank you, > Noah Silva No worries, Reinier > p.s.: I don't see a big deal in pulling in something like Synapse so > long as it compiles easily for your platform. You don't have to use all > the units, and the linker shouldn't even include all of the code from > the units you do use. If you only use one function that is mostly > contained (like HMAC), then it shouldn't add much to your program's size > in the scheme of things. I don't like when people use things that > aren't really needed mainly because you have to then download them and > pray they compile on your setup. (And in some cases, recompile > Lazarus!). For more common things that "just work", I have no issue. Agreed - Synapse is nicely self-contained and modular. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
