From: "Yuri Prokushev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date sent: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 12:03:32 -0400 (EDT)
Priority: Normal
Subject: Re: [Sibyl] changes
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >but I'd vote for something more
> >portable, like using DLLs with resourcestrings, or so.
> Well. If my target was portability then I just port the lazarus. Make
> new interface units not so hard as port from another compiler. And if
> just portability required then I can easely use gettext and don't look
> around. But I prefer to have native compiler (may be yes - with
> foreign targets, but not sure). I wan't use, i.e. XPCOM features if I
> have SOM. I don't want use, i.e. Perl, if I have REXX. And so on. Only
> if I see good results at the end.
DLLs _are_ native solution under OS/2 (as opposed to, say, gettext
.po files). I still think limiting ourselves to IBM tools (available
on OS/2 only and nowhere else) isn't a good idea. In addition, you'd
have to add support for this into the compiler, which would mean a
need for your own FPC branch (because such unportable construction
will probably never be included in the main branch) with all its
disadvantages.
Tomas
-----------
To unsubscribe yourself from this list, send the following message
to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
unsubscribe sibyl
end
