Am 26.10.2013 02:30 schrieb "ListMember" <[email protected]>: > > On 2013-10-25 14:53, Sven Barth wrote: > >> In my opinion that energy is better put into getting e.g. fcl-passrc up to date and keep it that way (so that at least each release can handle code that the compiler also accepts). > > > You're, of course, right. > > But, never mind the question of which part of what team will maintain it (and what triggers a maintenance request, other than a long after-the-fact bug report), how do you make sure that --at any moment in time-- fcl-passrc is up-to-date? >
The main > I mean, suppose --using fcl-passrc-- we went through all the publicly available code (repositories of FPC, Lazarus, etc.) and it reported no errors, would it prove/guarantee that fcl-passrc is up-to-date? > > If we could say that with enouh conjfidence, I'd gladly shift my focus to fcl-passrc. > > >> I already had the idea with DLLs once myself. >> >> As long as the interface for exchanging options (and maybe also unit locations ;) )is kept stable or at least backwards compatible this should work. And as long as the heaps are kept seperate unloading a compiler library should also solve the problem with memory leaks... (maybe add a function to the API to get the current heap state ^^) >> > > Naturally <g> I know nothing about the importance of heap especially in this context or probbaly in any relevant context. > > How hard would it be? > > > -- > _______________________________________________ > Lazarus mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
-- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
