Hi,

Pascal Viandier wrote:

...

When I say "compatible types", I say records with the same fields in the same order so I presume the padding bits and bytes would be done the same way.

Yes, but the pad bits and bytes can have random values ...

Ha! If only I could use FillChar() on the record before using it, there would be no problem! (Did you read the FillChar Suggestion thread?) This looks like a typical good reason to use it... I suppose the Extended Pascal's initial-state-specifier does not make initialization on padding bits and bytes neither.

snip<

But you have been warned.

If the padding content is random, I cannot use memcmp() reliably. I am done :-( Thank you very much anyway. Pascal Viandier pascal@accovia.com