On 25.07.2017 18:00, Martok wrote:
... FPC's intrinsics such as Insert() can already work with arrays:
Nonetheless, IMHO using single-Byte Strings (UTF-8 or RawByte, as a
proper "uncoded" string type brand does not exist), seems more
convenient, especially, as here we have lazy copy on top of
On 25.07.2017 10:54, Bo Berglund wrote:
so I need to write efficient replacements for certain string functions
(Delete, Insert, Copy etc).
Why do you think the string function (if using strictly just a single
UTF-8 or RawByte branded String type) are not efficient ?
If all string encoding b
Hello.
When TThread.Priority will be implemented ?
Why not give a compiler message that TThread.Priority is not yet implemented
when using it ?
Fre;D
-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context:
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/TThread-Priority-when-tp5729381.html
On Sat, 29 Jul 2017, fredvs wrote:
Hello.
When TThread.Priority will be implemented ?
When someone finds it important enough to make an implementation.
Why not give a compiler message that TThread.Priority is not yet implemented
when using it ?
Because
1. AFAIK it is implemented for wi
Hi,
FPC/Lazarus always tried stay compatible with Delphi... thus, why the
FPC XML classes is so different than Delphi classes?
Delphi XML is interface-based. There exists IXMLDocument, IXMLNode and so on.
FPC has just classes.
I have a FPC/Lazarus project that will be compatible with Delphi. I
w
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 16:35:05 +0200, Michael Schnell
wrote:
>On 25.07.2017 10:54, Bo Berglund wrote:
>> so I need to write efficient replacements for certain string functions
>> (Delete, Insert, Copy etc).
>Why do you think the string function (if using strictly just a single
>UTF-8 or RawByte
I am converting older code to move from AnsiString to TBytes as
non-text data container. While doing it I am using conditionals so I
don't destroy the working code until I have verified that the TBytes
usage is OK.
Now I have encountered use of BlockWrite where I would like to do the
following:
1