After FPC 3.0 final is released, would we have a bigger probability of a new version of Lazarus 1.4.6/1.4.8 + FPC 3.0 or Lazarus 1.6.0/2.0.0 + FPC 3.0?
Quote from: valdir.marcos on October 28, 2015, 04:45:18 amAfter FPC 3.0 final is released, would we have a bigger probability of a new version of Lazarus 1.4.6/1.4.8 + FPC 3.0 or Lazarus 1.6.0/2.0.0 + FPC 3.0?Lazarus 1.4.6/1.4.8 no.There are many Unicode related issues involved. We try to solve them with the new UTF-8 system as much as possible, but it still breaks old code in some situations.But hey, it should not be a problem for you because you can install FPC 3.0 (or the RC versions) and compile Lazarus using it.
since its so easy then how about back porting a couple of bug fixes or components to 1.4.4 add fpc 3 and name it 1.4.6 before stabilizing the utf8 port and lazarus 2.0?
Lazarus 1.4.6/1.4.8 no.There are many Unicode related issues involved. We try to solve them with the new UTF-8 system as much as possible, but it still breaks old code in some situations.
Quote from: taazz on October 28, 2015, 01:43:45 pmsince its so easy then how about back porting a couple of bug fixes or components to 1.4.4 add fpc 3 and name it 1.4.6 before stabilizing the utf8 port and lazarus 2.0?Yes, backporting Unicode related fixes should be OK.Releasing a Lazarus dot maintenance version with the new FPC 3.0 would however break too many things.
So, we would better keep on trunk (FPC 3.1 and Lazarus 1.5) for new projects until FPC 3.0 and Lazarus 1.6/2.0 are released?
Quote from: taazz on October 28, 2015, 01:43:45 pmsince its so easy then how about back porting a couple of bug fixes or components to 1.4.4 add fpc 3 and name it 1.4.6 before stabilizing the utf8 port and lazarus 2.0?Yes, backporting Unicode related fixes should be OK.Releasing a Lazarus dot maintenance version with the new FPC 3.0 would however break too many things.Proposed fixes to be merged can be added under "Submitted by others" here : http://wiki.freepascal.org/Lazarus_1.4_fixes_branch
If it is simple for us to replace fpc 2.6.4 with 3.0 then creating a new version should be easy too, ...
Quote from: taazz on October 28, 2015, 06:30:36 pmIf it is simple for us to replace fpc 2.6.4 with 3.0 then creating a new version should be easy too, ...Sure it would be easy to create such version but it would have nasty bugs.FPC 3.0 has a new codepage aware string type. It does not work well with LCL directly. That's why FPC team has kindly provided a system to switch the default encoding to UTF-8 and it works better than we expected in most situations.Some code however depends on Windows system encoding so much that the new system cannot be used. I have made a new wiki page to list problems and their solutions in such case: http://wiki.freepascal.org/Lazarus_with_FPC3.0_without_UTF-8_mode
In fact I understood that we need to support system codepage with FPC 3.0+ mostly because of feedback from you and some other people. I am a little surprised now that you don't seem to understand the issue at all.Anyway, we need help to find solutions and update the new wiki page. Also your help would be appreciated.
Quote from: valdir.marcos on October 28, 2015, 05:25:03 pmSo, we would better keep on trunk (FPC 3.1 and Lazarus 1.5) for new projects until FPC 3.0 and Lazarus 1.6/2.0 are released?I would recommend FPC 3.0 or this RC2 version together with Lazarus trunk if you are interested in its new Unicode support.If you are interested in latest development in FPC then of course you should use its trunk version, too.
Was FPC 3.0.0 tagged as final on 2015-11-12?