On Tue, 12 Jul 2016, Dennis wrote:
I always thought comparison of methods is done on both the data and the code
part.
TMethod = record
Code : CodePointer;
Data : Pointer;
end;
But the following proves it is NOT.
What is the rationale behind such behavior?
AFAIK:
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> PS. Maybe switching to git alone may make a checkout less painful, if we
> may
> believe some supporters... But that is the topic of a separate thread :-)
... and a separate list. Everyone, please continue all git-related
remarks/discussion on the fpc-other list.
Than
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
> PS. Maybe switching to git alone may make a checkout less painful, if we may
> believe some supporters... But that is the topic of a separate thread :-)
Wrong problem, better eliminate the need for repeated checkouts rather than
optimize them.
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016, Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
PS. Maybe switching to git alone may make a checkout less painful, if we may
believe some supporters... But that is the topic of a separate thread :-)
Wrong problem, better eliminate the need
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016, Dennis wrote:
I always thought comparison of methods is done on both the data and
the code part.
TMethod = record
Code : CodePointer;
Data : Pointer;
end;
But the following proves it is NOT.
What is the rationale b
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016, Dennis Poon wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016, Dennis wrote:
I always thought comparison of methods is done on both the data and the
code part.
TMethod = record
Code : CodePointer;
Data : Pointer;
end;
But the followi
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
> > In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
> >
> >> PS. Maybe switching to git alone may make a checkout less painful, if we
> >> may
> >> believe some supporters... But that is the topic of a separate thread :-)
> >
> > Wrong problem,
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016, Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
PS. Maybe switching to git alone may make a checkout less painful, if we may
believe some supporters... But that is the topic of a separate th
On 11 July 2016 at 18:35, Dennis Poon wrote:
>
>
> Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
>> Dennis wrote:
>>
>>> I know it is my responsibility to initialize out parameters, but I think
>>> the compiler could help us by initializing all out parameters.
>>>
>> The compiler will fill out-parameters with garbage if
Please excuse one of my regular silly questions. Elsewhere, a (former)
Delphi programmer is uneasy having found that his binaries have had
embedded SQL queries, passwords and so on visible "in clear" for the
last 20 years or so.
Can FPC be told to obfuscate ResourceStrings?
--
Mark Morgan Llo
On 2016-07-12 20:12, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
> Can FPC be told to obfuscate ResourceStrings?
No, but why the hell would you want to hard-code a password inside an
executable. Encrypt it externally and read it from a .INI file at
runtime (or prompt for a password). Even something as simple as
XorS
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 2016-07-12 20:12, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Can FPC be told to obfuscate ResourceStrings?
No, but why the hell would you want to hard-code a password inside an
executable. Encrypt it externally and read it from a .INI file at
runtime (or prompt for a password). Even
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Please excuse one of my regular silly questions. Elsewhere, a (former) Delphi
programmer is uneasy having found that his binaries have had embedded SQL
queries, passwords and so on visible "in clear" for the last 20 years or so.
Can FPC be told
On 2016-07-12 21:09, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
> I didn't say /I/ was the one doing it.
I know and I wasn’t implying you. It’s a figure of speech.
Regards,
Graeme
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/
14 matches
Mail list logo
