Am 19.02.2018 um 00:18 schrieb Michael Van Canneyt via Lazarus:
> Why is it obviously not true ? It's obviously not true that it is compatible
> at the binary level. FPC does not produce the same binary code
I'm more talking about the macroscopic perspective. Of course the binary code
may be different, but does it have the same concept of what a specific block of
source "means"?

Or, put differently,
> But source code written for Delphi must compile in FPC.
Should it also do something *similar*?

Just from the things that come up at least twice a year in the time since I
started actively following the lists... tempvar allocation and lifetimes
(especially with respect to interface refcounting), TBitmap Pixelformat & co,
LCL event order, my pet peeve small type memory layout...
I get why most of them are/must be different, it's just that code compiles, but
stops working. That's kinda the opposite of what the technical definition of
"source-code compatible" means.


Ceterum censeo b32079 esse sanandam.

Lazarus mailing list

Reply via email to