On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 01:14:50PM +0200, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Marco van de Voort <mar...@stack.nl> wrote: > > Not that I know. And btw, I also use arm-linux without android, so please > > keep that target intact and aligned with normal linux ports. > > What is the difference between using cwstring and paswstring? Any > reason for not wanting to use paswstring?
Simply integrating with the OS, and avoid inclusion of tables when not necessary. Moreover you are stating something as a fact here that was not discussed at all. > They should be 100% equal, except that one does not require any > external libraries. If you can test and check if there are any > differences of course would be excelent =) I haven't been testing it, and don't plan to. I'm not interested in it, and am not interested in growing the binaries unnecessarily. I have no problem with having a second option for the people that do want it, but that is something entirely different from what you were saying. Cwstring is staying on all normal targets as far as I know. -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus