David Heffernan

It depends on how you want to access the data. This isn't really related to associate array style access by key. The issues with value types and copying apply equally to all containers.

Why not? Surely the answer is the same as for objects. If you use a dictionary for objects, why not a dictionary for records?

This issue is covered explicitly by the documentation: http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/RADStudio/Sydney/en/Structured_Types_(Delphi)#Dynamic_Arrays

But your code can only be used for arrays of byte. Stefan is demonstrating generic code.

What does this offer over what Stefan posted in his article?

I'd be surprised if converting from VCL to FMX was simple enough to be usefully automated.

Why would there be conflicts in files that you have not modified? My advice to you is that before you try to change the process to fix the problem, you make sure that you have fully diagnosed the problem.

If you are not working in A, B and C then you simply should never see any conflicts. My guess is that someone in your organisation is using git incorrectly. No reason at all that you should have any troubles with all this in a single repo.

Oh. I took that to mean you want one repo for each of the 850 different variants.

850 repos for every client specific variation sounds kinda crazy. I suspect that you aren't getting great feedback here because your organisation's work flow is, er, unique.

Read Andy's comments to my answer in the SO post. If you care about performance, measure it.

No reason to give any credence to that comment. Ignore it and move on. Be happy that your code is not limited to text that can be encoded with whatever ANSI locale the machine it runs on is using.

Lightweight MREW sounds useful. One does wonder if it works, having experienced the monitor debacle.

You should have all your work in revision control. Then when your drive fails you still have it. Not to mention all the other benefits.

These things are determined at compile time. You can't declare either at run time. So why do you feel this a run time issue?

FWIW, I have always installed Delphi, even as far back as D6 under program files. Once Vista and UAC arrived, I recall having to add a couple of permissive ACLs onto a couple of files, but it was pretty trivial. And had the benefit of keeping my machine nice and tidy. I understand that people have different preferences, but I just wanted to point out that installing under program files is not as terrifying as it can be made out.

UAC, virtualization, etc. was introduced with Vista in 2006

Doesn't virtualization take care of all of this? Or does the D7 IDE have an app manifest?

What does it write there?

This topic is not about what is considered the right way to handle manifests. It's about tracking down the inclusion of a resource whose origin is not immediately obvious.

XPMan is still there: http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/Libraries/Sydney/en/Vcl.XPMan.TXPManifest

The unit is named XPMan. Search for that.

You still need comments for future readers.

It's automatically deleted here. Try setting up a brand new app and check how it behaves there.

I use SHAutoComplete and don't have any issues.