[Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

[Juha Manninen]

On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 7:23 PM, Giuliano Colla
<giuliano.colla at fastwebnet.it> wrote:
> Back to the original thread subject, IMO the best course is simply to remove
> the PaintSwastika procedure, which is out of place in a small collection of
> simple graphic shapes ...

Yes, I also realized how limited the selection of graphs there was.
Such a library should have everything or nothing.
And yes, the library does not belong to the project's core
distribution. Instead we should ASAP have an online package installer
which has been planned for long but still not implemented. I must lift
it up in my own priority list.

I still think such library is justified because it is not a collection
of image files but a code library drawing simple graph symbols and
flags on canvas. For a complicated graph an image file is better.
This library would also compete with Unicode text because Unicode now
contains many well known graphics, but fonts installed on a system may
not support them all.
The library could be made as a helper class for TCanvas thus making it
easy to use.

Anyway I am sorry for my strong comments. Opinions around this topic
inevitably insult and intimidate somebody.

Juha