The Wiert Corner – irregular stream of stuff

Jeroen W. Pluimers on .NET, C#, Delphi, databases, and personal interests

  • My badges

  • Twitter Updates

  • My Flickr Stream

  • Pages

  • All categories

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 1,418 other followers

Delphi: ZEROBASEDSTRINGS and maintaining cross-version Delphi libraries

Posted by jpluimers on 2015/01/14

One of the features that bites me over and over again is the ZEROBASEDSTRINGS that got introduced in Delphi XE3 and is by default ON in mobile compilers and OFF in Desktop compilers.

Back then, Mark Edington showed a small example of the effects:

and then explained:

The XE3 RTL source code has been refactored to be string index base agnostic. In most cases this is done by utilizing string helper functions which are always zero based.
When it is necessary to traverse a string, the Char[] property is often used to access the individual characters without concern for the current state of the compiler with respect to zero based strings.

In addition, the “Low” and “High” standard functions can now be passed a string variable to provide further flexibility as needed.
When zero based strings are enabled, Low(string) will return 0,  otherwise it will return 1. Likewise, High() returns a bounds adjusted length variation.

The problem is the non-existent forward compatibility of the other compilers (Delphi XE2 and lower).

So if you have library code that needs to work in Delphi versions, you cannot use the High and Low to make the code ZEROBASEDSTRINGS neutral.

Many Delphi developers regularly skip many Delphi versions, so these are still popular:

  • Delphi XE1 and XE2 (the last 2 compilers before Delphi really started to support mobile)
  • Delphi 2007 (the last non-Unicode Delphi compiler)
  • Delphi 7 (the last non-Galileo IDE)

The result is that library code is full of conditionan IF/IFDEF blocks like these:

Fix: this works only in XE3 or higher: “for Index := Low(input) to High(input) do // for ZEROBASEDSTRINGS”


via: Mark Edington’s Delphi Blog : XE3 RTL Changes: A closer look at TStringHelper.

8 Responses to “Delphi: ZEROBASEDSTRINGS and maintaining cross-version Delphi libraries”

  1. John said

    ZEROBASEDSTRINGS made existing Delphi libraries pointless for future mobile developments, and made Delphi pointless as well.

    Existing codebase was the only Delphi advantage: the compiler is outclassed, the new IDE is slow and ridden with bugs, and so are the new libraries. It’s simpler to start from scratch on a mainstream development language.

  2. […] me, but here is a case where Embarcadero seems to be out to get everyone.  Jeroen provides an excellent little blog post about it and I recommend you read that first to understand the […]

  3. Of course you to abstract from these differences by implementing functions like

    function StrLow(const _s: string);
    {$ifdef GX_VER240_up}
    Result := Low(_s); // for ZEROBASEDSTRINGS
    Result := 1;
    {$endif GX_VER240_up}

    function StrHigh(const _s: string);
    {$ifdef GX_VER240_up}
    Result := High(_s); // for ZEROBASEDSTRINGS
    Result := Length(_s);
    {$endif GX_VER240_up}

    and using them as

    for Index := StrLow(input) to StrHigh(input) do

    reducing the ifdef pain to these two functions.

  4. Krom Stern said

    My research on the topic:

  5. sglienke said

    Or you just write {$ZEROBASEDSTRINGS OFF}.

  6. HeartWare said

    I use these two routines. They can easily be adapted to handle earlier versions of the compiler:

    FUNCTION GetChar(CONST S : String ; OneBasedIndex : LongWord) : CHAR;
    IF LOW(STRING)=0 THEN Result:=S[PRED(OneBasedIndex)] ELSE Result:=S[OneBasedIndex]

    PROCEDURE SetChar(VAR S : String ; OneBasedIndex : LongWord ; C : CHAR);
    IF LOW(STRING)=0 THEN S[PRED(OneBasedIndex)]:=C ELSE S[OneBasedIndex]:=C

    This way, I isolate the various implementation details to these two routines.

  7. gabr42 said

    Agreed. ZEROBASEDSTRINGS was the most stupid addition to the Delphi language. Ever. Even worse than the ‘with’ statement.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: