[Lazarus] C Integer types

[Hans-Peter Diettrich]

Bernd Kreuss schrieb:
> On 08.07.2012 17:18, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
> 
>> IMO all these members should be pointers, of size 64 bit according to 
>> the index increment (8 bytes?).
> 
> You are right, I didn't look carefully enough. Too much ad-hoc pointer
> arithmetics and dereferencing around too many corners within the same
> expression.
> 
> Thats exactly the reason why I believe that defining types that describe
> the data (especially the more complex and not so obvious structures)
> *before* actually starting to write code that operates on it is better
> than the other way around.

Often it is not desired, or even not possible, to describe a commonly 
used data structure with properly typed members (cyclic unit 
references!). That's when even in Pascal untyped pointers or handles 
have to be passed around, which have a specific meaning only in specific 
parts of the code.

DoDi