Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
> Feel free to add the encoding to those functions you think it is not
> clear and send a patch.
I would like to. But how do I get the information?
It's open source. You are a programmer. You have an IDE.
How do you think others are getting the information?
Information should be provided in a useful manner, not by pointing out
ways how a *guru* might obtain it.
You see the vicious circle?
Yes, but I hope others will not follow your example.
You really hope so? :-(
I.e. you hope that others will give in before asking questions, which
are required to improve the documentation? When they read in
contributions (like yours) that they will never get substancial answers,
and no real assistance by the core developers?
How much could have been changed in the documentation until now, when
the contributing gurus had spent their time in improving it on every
question, instead of defending their disgust of doing so themselves,
over and over again?
Or do you mean I should find out the encoding by trial and error for
each function
myself (bulding a test program around them) because this is the only way
to get it?
Who wants to program with such a programming language where encoding for
function parameters is not documented?
It seems it's for the hard core developers only.
Ah, no answer on these questions?
> A volunteer project like Lazarus requires the help of volunteers.
Yes. If you send me a list of the expected/used string encoding for *all*
function parameters then I can add this information to the documentation
when I find out how to do that.
lol
What a nice and encouraging attitude :-(
DoDi
--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
