[Lazarus] Does Lazarus support a complete Unicode Component Library?

[Hans-Peter Diettrich]

Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:

> String is a generic type (it already has multiple meanings), so it
> should evolve.

Generic types should never evolve in a breaking way.

Look how even the FPC developers have banned the use of AnsiString, for 
performance reasons. [What raises the next question: what can we expect 
from designers of such an mental background, with regards to type 
evolution ;-]

> On a side note:
> Just like I think Integer type should have evolved (like it did from
> 16-bit to 32-bit in the past), so too it should have moved to 64-bit.

Adding encodings to the string type looks to me like turning "integer" 
into "complex".

> But unfortunately the powers that be, decided that its evolution should
> magically stop at 32-bits - no idea why really.

This specific issue was discussed in depth, across all platforms and 
languages. When somebody needs a guaranteed "capacity" for his integral 
numbers, he can choose from many representations (Currency, Int64, 
BCD...) or, in Pascal, he can use subranges. Where "subrange" does not 
necessarily mean less than 32 bits, but could be extended to any bitcount.

> But that's a whole different discussion. ;-)

Not really ;-)

DoDi