[lazarus] About compatibility???

[Matjaz Mihelic]

I'm developing a new approach that I need for software I'm developing (a 
bit more usefull than Borland has developed) and I'm interested how 
important is direct Delphi compatibility to lazarus project, since I 
would like to discuss possibility of change in CVS (extending some things).

REASON:
Here is the reason why: I need few different approaches to data with 
same form in my app and I wouldn't like to develop new edit control for 
every one. I've always hated to have twenty edit controls just for 
accesing different data) So I'm developing a kind of data wrappers that 
use standard component set that's already in lazarus.

EXPLANATION:
I would like to contribute them to main branch, but only if you'd be 
comfortable with breaking delphi and kylix component compatibility (not 
by losing but gaining).

Idea means avoiding developing dbcontrols and make editing wrappers, 
which can be connected to any source not only db. So far there are only 
lightly changed lcl components that don't make control incomaptible with 
the one in CVS. Light change means few lines of code for one control and 
a bit more for TControl but still not much. Same control can be 
standalone or wrapped one. Question is not which control would we use, 
question is which wrapper or listwrapper (DB, XML, 
whateveryounameit...). Same function that would allow app to combine 
several complitely different approaches in same app, with no form 
difference, except data wrappers. (P.S. It would not disable possibility 
to make delphi compatibility layer based on wrappers, with a little 
clean code, this controls could easily be developed, but I personally am 
the last person that would be interested in that)

It's not quite developed yet (first results are showing already), but in 
a month or so, there should be some first final results already.

I know this is a bit selfish since I've got no Delphi and Kylix appz to 
maintain (used C, FPC, XML...), but I wonder how others think about that 
kind of approach.

The second question one is more lazarus IDE connected: Does anybody 
except me misses some kind of preprocessor in pascal. If borland hasn't 
included one that should not be the rule for pascal not allowing that 
option.

Some comments???

matjaz