On 12/29/2013 07:26 PM, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
My view on RawByteString:
My view on RawByteString originally had been that it can hold strings of
any encoding and the software that gets such a variable (or function
argument) can detect the actual encoding and behave accordingly. Thus
"dynamically generic" functions can be done, handling any encoding style
which is very appropriate as there can be sensible functionalists that
don't need to know the encoding at all or not in detail (such as
"blindly" storing and retrieving the information, concatenating, ...).
But I (not owning XE) learned that this is not the case with XE, so
maybe inventing a differently name string subtype might be appropriate.
-Michael
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
