[Lazarus] dynamic string proposal

[Mattias Gaertner]

On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 13:47:26 +0200
Michael Schnell via Lazarus <lazarus at lists.lazarus-ide.org> wrote:

> On 16.08.2017 13:17, Mattias Gaertner via Lazarus wrote:
> > You are confusing people if you name your encodings like this.   
> There also is no "official" Code pages named "Default" or "None", the 
> naming "CP_DEFAULT" and "CP_NONE" has just been invented by Emparcadero.

It is not about "official". A codepage describes a character set. What
has your CP_QWORD to do with any character set?

 
>[...]
> > What is the intention of your proposal?  
> 
> That is given in the instructional paragraph "The problem":
> "The most obvious candidate for pain on that behalf is “TStrings”.

I read it, but I must admit, I don't understand it. For some unknown
reason you want to store different encodings in a TStrings and fear
the "time-consuming" and loss-prone auto conversions. And then it
sounds as if this is a common problem ("much more urgent").


>[...]
> Enhancing the count of available encoding brandings is just a logical 
> consequence of a less problem prone and more versatile (not implicitly 
> restricted to printable text) overall string handling.

Who wants to have more encodings?
AFAIK everyone wants less, preferably only one.

 
> -Michael (It's rather frustrating to discuss that obviously never will 
> happen :-()

Not if complicated things get more complicated.

Mattias