On 20/11/2007, Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Fair enough. I'm not a fan of Variants either, but how else would I > > write the PropertyMatch() function then? Yes I could do some extra > > tests and use GetStrProp, GetIntProp, GetFloatProp etc. > > This is IMHO the only correct way.
I've extended the PropertyMatch() function to test for tkBool types (no variants) and do a writeln when it finds it. That parts seems to work fine. > > It probably retuns an int(64), and when it's converted to variant > - I don't know. I'd have to look at the code. That would be great. I'm on my way home now, but will continue looking at the code tomorrow. More eyeballs on the code is always better. > > This is exactly where the easy access to RTTI would come in handy, and > which is why I would like to have it. If you want we can always discuss > in private the design of such an easy-acces method. I've created a tiRTTI.pas unit in tiOPF, but it's simply wrappers for calling many other functions. It makes it a bit easier to use RTTI though. But yes I wouldn't mind discussion an 'easy-access' method for RTTI. Regards, - Graeme - _______________________________________________ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
