On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 11:10:45 +0200
"Guy Fink" <[email protected]> wrote:

> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> Von: Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho <[email protected]>
> An: [email protected], Lazarus mailing list 
> <[email protected]>
> Betreff: Re: [Lazarus] rewriting of LConvEncoding
> 
> > 2010/9/20  <[email protected]>:
> > > I would rewrite the entire unit
> >
> > Great, just make sure you take all variables into account:
> >
> > * code size (check if your tables are smartlinkable. The current ones
> > are)
> > * speed
> > * maintenability
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 10:16 PM, Mattias Gaertner
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > And the tables are quite big. Maybe the unit should be splitted
> > into
> > > several units.
> >
> > In my tests the asian tables are smartlinked and won't be added unless
> > necessary.
> >
> > Splitting into several units is also possible, but then a registration
> > mechanism should be added.
> >
> > --
> > Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
> 
> My first idea of the structure then:
> 
> A ConvertEncoding-unit, containing all the necessary types,constants, 
> function prototypes and the Unicodestuff. (conversions between the different 
> UTF-variants). It could hold some jumptables for the conversion procedures, 
> which are initalized to a local dummy function.
> 
> Then I do not generate include files, but a complete unit for every codepage 
> we add.  This unit will register itself to the ConverEncoding-unit in its 
> initialisation part. So the user has full control over supported codepages of 
> his application by simply using the the needed codepage-units.

I think one unit per group is sufficient. For finer granularity there
is smartlinking.

Mattias

--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Reply via email to