On 7/5/2019 5:07 AM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
Op 2019-07-05 om 13:53 schreef Ralf Quint:
IMO, the variants in a variant record should always overlay
correctly (like unions in C),
so the variant part should start at offset 32 in this case, and
this is where all three
variants should start.
Op 2019-07-05 om 13:53 schreef Ralf Quint:
IMO, the variants in a variant record should always overlay
correctly (like unions in C),
so the variant part should start at offset 32 in this case, and this
is where all three
variants should start.
This is not a guarantee case in the Pascal lang
On 7/5/2019 3:27 AM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
Op 2019-07-05 om 11:49 schreef Bernd Oppolzer:
IMO, the variants in a variant record should always overlay correctly
(like unions in C),
so the variant part should start at offset 32 in this case, and this
is where all three
variants should sta
Op 2019-07-05 om 11:49 schreef Bernd Oppolzer:
IMO, the variants in a variant record should always overlay correctly
(like unions in C),
so the variant part should start at offset 32 in this case, and this
is where all three
variants should start.
This is not a guarantee case in the Pascal
On 2019-07-05 11:49, Bernd Oppolzer wrote:
This question is not directly related to FPC, but it is instead a
Pascal question in general.
.
.
BTW: is there a forum to discuss general Pascal questions not directly
related to the FPC product?
FPC-Pascal will sure be the largest auditorium availa
This question is not directly related to FPC, but it is instead a Pascal
question in general.
Take this record definition:
type S1 = record
X : CHAR ( 27 ) ;
case INTEGER of
1 :
( V : INTEGER ) ;
2 :
( W : REAL
Be careful, the code below is codepage dependent. TStrings.GetTextStr
does not inspect the codepage of each string and simply moves the
characters into a common buffer. Fast, but the question is: are you
using the hash to compare two string lists that are binary equivalent or
two string lists t
