Re: [Lazarus] Bugs in Delphi DragTo?
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: Lazarus uses almost the same implementation in TDragPerformer, what IMO should be fixed. What needs to be fixed? Do you have an example where this does not works? DragImageList is not a control, so it is normal that it stops dragging when Target = nil. Furthermore I wonder whether it makes sense to show both a drag image *and* an docking frame (in the code below the above snippet, when ActiveDrag=dopDock). DragImageLists is used only for usual drag operations while drag-dock is not a usual drag operation. To represent this operation docking frame is used and there is no need to mix both representations of drag. Best regards, Paul Ishenin. ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
[Lazarus] Trunk cannot compile. Missing unit 'PropEdits'
I just got an svn update for Lazarus to r18979. I did a make clean and build and it fails with the missing unit 'PropEdits' in the SynPropertyEditObjectList unit. Regards, - Graeme - ___ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Trunk cannot compile. Missing unit 'PropEdits'
I just got an svn update for Lazarus to r18979. I did a make clean and build and it fails with the missing unit 'PropEdits' in the SynPropertyEditObjectList unit. you nead to clean all. infact, i've had to delete the whole units (compiler units) directory. Thanks, Dmitry ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Trunk cannot compile. Missing unit 'PropEdits'
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: I just got an svn update for Lazarus to r18979. I did a make clean and build and it fails with the missing unit 'PropEdits' in the SynPropertyEditObjectList unit. We had some problems before but there were already solved. Try to make clean bigide. Best regards, Paul Ishenin. ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Trunk cannot compile. Missing unit 'PropEdits'
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:19 AM, dmitry boyarintsev skalogryz.li...@gmail.com wrote: I just got an svn update for Lazarus to r18979. I did a make clean and build and it fails with the missing unit 'PropEdits' in the SynPropertyEditObjectList unit. you nead to clean all. infact, i've had to delete the whole units (compiler units) directory. I found the solution. It was explained in a message some time back entitled 'SVN followers. incompatible changes'. after I did a 'make bigide', I could recompile the IDE from the Tools menu and select GTK1 without problems. Regards, - Graeme - ___ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
[Lazarus] Code Folding mess and Code Divider feature
Hi, This relates to the new bug report: http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=13322 Code Folding seems to have gone way overboard! It simply makes the editor look like a mess at the moment (Lazarus svn trunk revision). What is the end goal of code folding? Maybe is in the middle of the overall goal and I am simply acting to quickly. Either way, I will voice my concerns... In older versions of Lazarus the Code Folding [+] was in logical places. begin..end blocks. Now they appear on Implementation sections, uses classes, procedure/function level, begin..end block of procedure/function, begin..end block of if statements, var blocks etc... You end up with code looking as follows (code folding plusses everywhere)! == [+]implementation [+]uses MyUnit1; [+]procedure MyTest [+]var x: integer; [+]begin [+] if x 0 then begin bla bla bal end; end; == I would much rather prefer a more sanely and less verbose code folding that does the following: == implementation uses myUnit1; [+]procedure MyTest var x: integer; begin if x 0 then begin bla bla bal end; end; == At the moment it is more like trying to spot a line of code that doesn't have a [+] in the gutter!! This is just causing clutter and not actually adding any value as far as I can see. Especially now that the code folding lines and +/- signs are inside the editor code area and not the gutter area. OK, so we all know synedit now supports code folding, but we don't need it on every line. Maybe Lazarus should have a Code Folding verbosity level going from 'Normal Code Folding' to 'Insane Code Folding'. This brings me to another point. Initially the Code Folding was not as verbose, so I tied the Draw Code Divider feature into the Code Folding feature. But now that Code Folding is so verbose it now makes no more sense and seems to get broken quite often. Maybe the draw code divider should become a separate feature and not tied into the code folding. The idea of draw code divider was simply to draw a horizontal line at the end of each procedure or method (like visual basic 6 did). I have no interest in drawing horizontal divider lines wherever code folding can occur. And with the current verbose level of code folding and horizontal lines (if they work) you will actually struggle to see your code between the whole mess. Your thoughts? Regards, - Graeme - ___ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
[Lazarus] TProcess 2-way conversation
Hi,
I'm writing a quick an dirty app to automate some commands which would
normally be issued by a terminal something like PuTTy.
To do this I'm using TProcess to call plink.exe and then trying to ssh
into the remote box and issue commands.
In short I want to log into the remote box and execute commands 'cd
/opt/someappdir' and './someapp', taking the input through one memo
and using another memo to issue the commands.
Can anyone point me in the right direction? I can open the terminal:
PLink.CommandLine := 'plink.exe -ssh -pw
'+options.Values['Password']+' -batch
'+options.Values['User']+'@'+options.Values['Server'];
but sending subsequent calls fail:
PLink.CommandLine := 'cd /opt/someappdir/ta';
Error message: 'Failed to execute cd /opt/someappdir/ta'
If I omit the subsequent calls it works roughly as expected:
Plink.Options := [poUsePipes];
Memo1.Append('-- executing --');
Screen.Cursor:=crHourGlass;
PLink.Execute;
M.SetSize(BytesRead + READ_BYTES);
n := PLink.Output.Read((M.Memory + BytesRead)^, READ_BYTES);
if n 0
then begin
S.LoadFromStream(M);
Memo1.Append(S.Text)
end;
S.Free;
M.Free;
and I get the following in memo1:
-- executing --
Last login: Fri Mar 13 02:49:21 2009 from 192.168.37.43
Y?J??9?a?f ??/F?#2۶?/??Y.KDPx?R?`?8?\.ow?z%
Can anybody suggest something here? Or point me in a better direction.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Code Folding mess and Code Divider feature
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: Hi, This relates to the new bug report: http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=13322 Code Folding seems to have gone way overboard! It simply makes the editor look like a mess at the moment (Lazarus svn trunk revision). What is the end goal of code folding? Maybe is in the middle of the overall goal and I am simply acting to quickly. Either way, I will voice my concerns... There is a general plan/idea to add some configuration (have to see how much) to define what you want to have foldable and what not. It wasn't seen as urgent yet (at least not by me...) Most (if not all) of the places that allow folding now, do so in Delphi as well. this is part of why they have been added, to make it easier for (ex-) Delphi users. IMHO most of the new ones are reasonable? - Except maybe for: Program / Unit and Implementation / interface; but they don't occur very often in a normal unit. - Maybe discussable are var Canost type blocks? Think is they can be very useful for bigger var sections (but I agree they can be irritating with just on line in it) - Folding at class / private / public = IMHO should be ok? - Folding at procedure in addition to the begin = arguable, if it should be instead of the begin? Will be interested to see, if other people will voice opinions, which of the new foldings they like, which not In older versions of Lazarus the Code Folding [+] was in logical places. begin..end blocks. Now they appear on Implementation sections, uses classes, procedure/function level, begin..end block of procedure/function, begin..end block of if statements, var blocks etc... You end up with code looking as follows (code folding plusses everywhere)! . At the moment it is more like trying to spot a line of code that doesn't have a [+] in the gutter!! This is just causing clutter and not actually adding any value as far as I can see. Especially now that the code folding lines and +/- signs are inside the editor code area and not the gutter area. OK, so we all know synedit now supports code You can change this: The gutter divider line is moveable, and the code fold background color adjustable. Only the code-folding is now on the right side of the gutter (towards the text) rather than the left, as it used to be. Enviroment=options=editor=display= gutter separator index Enviroment=options=editor=color= code folding tree (3rd in box) folding, but we don't need it on every line. Maybe Lazarus should have a Code Folding verbosity level going from 'Normal Code Folding' to 'Insane Code Folding'. This brings me to another point. Initially the Code Folding was not as verbose, so I tied the Draw Code Divider feature into the Code Folding feature. But now that Code Folding is so verbose it now makes no more sense and seems to get broken quite often. Maybe the draw code divider should become a separate feature and not tied into the code folding. The idea of draw code divider was simply to draw a horizontal line at the end of each procedure or method (like visual basic 6 did). I have no interest in drawing horizontal divider lines wherever code folding can occur. And with the current verbose level of code folding and horizontal lines (if they work) you will actually struggle to see your code between the whole mess. That can be looked at / I can see the benefit of such a feature. Not sure where it gets broken? Are the pictures from different versions of lazarus? or are they with different settings? If you want then at begin/end level you need to set the divider draw level higher = the down side is, there will be additional dividers. This may not be the effect you desire, but it is the effect intended. Best Regards Martin ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] TProcess 2-way conversation
Am Freitag, 13. März 2009 12:23 schrieb Dave Coventry:
Hi,
I'm writing a quick an dirty app to automate some commands which
would normally be issued by a terminal something like PuTTy.
To do this I'm using TProcess to call plink.exe and then trying to
ssh into the remote box and issue commands.
In short I want to log into the remote box and execute commands 'cd
/opt/someappdir' and './someapp', taking the input through one memo
and using another memo to issue the commands.
Can anyone point me in the right direction? I can open the terminal:
PLink.CommandLine := 'plink.exe -ssh -pw
'+options.Values['Password']+' -batch
'+options.Values['User']+'@'+options.Values['Server'];
but sending subsequent calls fail:
PLink.CommandLine := 'cd /opt/someappdir/ta';
Error message: 'Failed to execute cd /opt/someappdir/ta'
Your process is plink.exe. any further communication should go through
plink.input and plink.output, e.g. (not tested):
...
plink.execute;
{ read welcome message from plink.output }
remoteCommand:='cd /opt/someappdir/ta'#10;
plink.input.write(remoteCommand[1],length(remoteCommand));
{ read (echo and?) result of previous command}
regards
Burkhard
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] TProcess 2-way conversation
Dave Coventry schreef: Hi, I'm writing a quick an dirty app to automate some commands which would normally be issued by a terminal something like PuTTy. To do this I'm using TProcess to call plink.exe and then trying to ssh into the remote box and issue commands. In short I want to log into the remote box and execute commands 'cd /opt/someappdir' and './someapp', taking the input through one memo and using another memo to issue the commands. Can anyone point me in the right direction? I can open the terminal: See the process example: http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Executing_External_Programs#Using_input_and_output_of_a_TProcess and https://lazarus-ccr.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/lazarus-ccr/examples/process/ Vincent ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Compiling for both GTK1 and GTK2 in Lazarus built from SVN
On 3/11/09, Vincent Snijders vsnijd...@vodafonevast.nl wrote: b...@simenon:~/svnroot/lazarus make lcl LCL_PLATFORM=gtk1 make lcl LCL_PLATFORM=gtk Aargh I'm feeling rather stupid now... Thanks, Bart ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] TFloatSpinEdit and DecimalSeparator (GTK)
You included clocale unit in your .dpr (UNIX targets only) ? DecimalSeparator at programstart: '.' (period) = DEFAULT , that means that clocale unit is missing. I was under the impression that the value of SysUtils.DecimalSeparator was determined/set at programstart using locale settings? (At least in Windows it seems to be) Are they hardcoded in Linux version of SysUtils? I'll try inclusing clocale unit and see what it does. Do I have to call some proc/function to make it set the value of DecimalSeparator? DecimalSeparator visible in control: ',' (comma) = that means that gtk controls uses libc (right) locales, setted up by LANG variable. And GTK1 differs form GTK2 with same locale setting? What LANG variable should I look for? (I'm not sure but I think I only saw one: it's value being nl_NL or something the like) Bart ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Code Folding mess and Code Divider feature
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 2:16 PM, Martin Friebe laza...@mfriebe.de wrote:
What is the end goal of code folding? Maybe is in the middle of the
overall goal and I am simply acting to quickly. Either way, I will
voice my concerns...
There is a general plan/idea to add some configuration (have to see how
much) to define what you want to have foldable and what not. It wasn't
seen as urgent yet (at least not by me...)
OK thanks. So configuration is in the pipeline - that is good to know. :)
Most (if not all) of the places that allow folding now, do so in Delphi
as well. this is part of why they have been added, to make it easier for
(ex-) Delphi users.
I did not know that. I last used Delphi 7 which had no code folding.
I've only seen code folding in other editors and they were not that
verbose as the current synedit in Lazarus. This is why I thought I
would mention it.
IMHO most of the new ones are reasonable?
- Except maybe for: Program / Unit and Implementation /
interface; but they don't occur very often in a normal unit.
I don't see the point of 'Program' or 'Unit' level. Many the others
could be useful.
- Folding at procedure in addition to the begin = arguable, if it
should be instead of the begin?
I'm not sure about this one either. I would have thought the first
'begin' after a procedure or function should be ok.
At the moment it is more like trying to spot a line of code that
doesn't have a [+] in the gutter!! This is just causing clutter and
not actually adding any value as far as I can see. Especially now that
the code folding lines and +/- signs are inside the editor code area
and not the gutter area. OK, so we all know synedit now supports code
You can change this:
The gutter divider line is moveable, and the code fold background color
adjustable.
I know the gutter divider line is movable, but I didn't know the
background color is adjustable. I'll give this another try. See the
original bug report for my editor colour scheme - it's not quite
standard colours which probably exaggerated the problem a bit. ;-)
Enviroment=options=editor=color= code folding tree (3rd in box)
Thanks, this makes code folding look a lot better already. My gutter
is a different colour to the editor background. Now the code folding
tree blends in much better with the gutter part.
code folding. The idea of draw code divider was simply to draw a
horizontal line at the end of each procedure or method (like visual
basic 6 did). I have no interest in drawing horizontal divider lines
wherever code folding can occur. And with the current verbose level of
That can be looked at / I can see the benefit of such a feature.
Before horizontal line drawing between procedures / functions, I have
seen programmers add spaces to separate methods. Or use comments as
dividers. eg: {---}
Those are all waisted efforts and get in the way of coding and
programs such as 'pasdoc'. The visual effect of synedit drawing the
line (without anything actually being in the source code) is brilliant
and gives a much better look!
I think it will be worth having as a separate feature to code folding.
And at the moment I can only see it being useful between procedures,
functions and methods. I would ignore nested methods for now - it can
be added at a later date if the need arises.
Not sure where it gets broken? Are the pictures from different versions
of lazarus? or are they with different settings?
Nope, the screenshots in the bug report is all taken using the same
project, settings and Lazarus version. I simply switched tabs and took
screenshots.
If you want then at begin/end level you need to set the divider draw
level higher = the down side is, there will be additional dividers.
This may not be the effect you desire, but it is the effect intended.
I think my original idea or method dividers got lost somewhere. :-) I
only indented the feature to have dividers between procedures,
functions and methods. No nested methods and no other code folding
areas.
Regards,
- Graeme -
___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Compiling for both GTK1 and GTK2 in Lazarus built from SVN
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Bart bartjun...@gmail.com wrote: On 3/11/09, Vincent Snijders vsnijd...@vodafonevast.nl wrote: b...@simenon:~/svnroot/lazarus make lcl LCL_PLATFORM=gtk1 make lcl LCL_PLATFORM=gtk Maybe I missed it, but is this information in any of the readme files? I looked in lazdir/readme and lazdir/docs/ and couldn't find this information. It it's not mentioned anywhere, maybe we should add it. I found information about 'bigide', 'idebig' etc., but nothing about LCL_PLATFORM or the available options... Regards, - Graeme - ___ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Code Folding mess and Code Divider feature
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
code folding. The idea of draw code divider was simply to draw a
horizontal line at the end of each procedure or method (like visual
basic 6 did). I have no interest in drawing horizontal divider lines
wherever code folding can occur. And with the current verbose level of
That can be looked at / I can see the benefit of such a feature.
Before horizontal line drawing between procedures / functions, I have
seen programmers add spaces to separate methods. Or use comments as
dividers. eg: {---}
Those are all waisted efforts and get in the way of coding and
programs such as 'pasdoc'. The visual effect of synedit drawing the
line (without anything actually being in the source code) is brilliant
and gives a much better look!
I think it will be worth having as a separate feature to code folding.
And at the moment I can only see it being useful between procedures,
functions and methods. I would ignore nested methods for now - it can
be added at a later date if the need arises.
If you set the draw level to 3 or maybe 4, you should get the correct
divider draw levels.
You will have to ignore the dividers drawn at the end of implementation
sections
Not sure where it gets broken? Are the pictures from different versions
of lazarus? or are they with different settings?
Nope, the screenshots in the bug report is all taken using the same
project, settings and Lazarus version. I simply switched tabs and took
screenshots.
so they are all with
Settings:
Code Folding: Enabled
Divider Draw Level: 1
?
In that case the first picture is wrong = with DDL=1 there should be no
line between procedures (it would be at the end of the unit level.)
Not sure if complete:
DDL 1: unit level
DDL 2: implementation/ interface
DDL 3: Procedure implementation / class declaration
since you only switched tabs = did you aybe change config in your
session? maybe the issue was that the config change was not set to all
editors?
If you want then at begin/end level you need to set the divider draw
level higher = the down side is, there will be additional dividers.
This may not be the effect you desire, but it is the effect intended.
I think my original idea or method dividers got lost somewhere. :-) I
only indented the feature to have dividers between procedures,
functions and methods. No nested methods and no other code folding
areas.
try level 3.
Best Regards
Martin
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Code Folding mess and Code Divider feature
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Martin Friebe laza...@mfriebe.de wrote: so they are all with Settings: Code Folding: Enabled Divider Draw Level: 1 ? Yes In that case the first picture is wrong = with DDL=1 there should be no line between procedures (it would be at the end of the unit level.) Not sure if complete: DDL 1: unit level DDL 2: implementation/ interface DDL 3: Procedure implementation / class declaration ah, nice to actually know what each level means. :-) Maybe that should be place in the options screen instead of just numbers. since you only switched tabs = did you aybe change config in your session? maybe the issue was that the config change was not set to all editors? That seems to be the partial cause. Setting the level to 3 gives the most desirable outcome I wanted. But only after I restarted Lazarus, did all the editors update. So there is one bug - not all editors get updated. I then played with the levels to see how they differ. After changing the level, i did a Lazarus restart. It seems at Level = 2, I again get the same behaviour as the bug report. Even with a restart. So that seems to be another bug. try level 3. Yes, that gives the best results for me. Regards, - Graeme - ___ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Code Folding mess and Code Divider feature
Martin Friebe wrote: There is a general plan/idea to add some configuration (have to see how much) to define what you want to have foldable and what not. It wasn't seen as urgent yet (at least not by me...) Most (if not all) of the places that allow folding now, do so in Delphi as well. this is part of why they have been added, to make it easier for (ex-) Delphi users. Is it possible have folding or more specifically identification for case/end pairs? ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] TFloatSpinEdit and DecimalSeparator (GTK)
On Friday 13 March 2009 14:27, Bart wrote: You included clocale unit in your .dpr (UNIX targets only) ? DecimalSeparator at programstart: '.' (period) = DEFAULT , that means that clocale unit is missing. I was under the impression that the value of SysUtils.DecimalSeparator was determined/set at programstart using locale settings? (At least in Windows it seems to be) Are they hardcoded in Linux version of SysUtils? Under windows SysUtils have correct locales, but under unix (linux mac) it's a mess, so that's the reason of clocale unit usage. With clocale included you'll get correct locales. I'll try inclusing clocale unit and see what it does. Do I have to call some proc/function to make it set the value of DecimalSeparator? No, but you can always say DecimalSeparator := ','; DecimalSeparator visible in control: ',' (comma) = that means that gtk controls uses libc (right) locales, setted up by LANG variable. And GTK1 differs form GTK2 with same locale setting? What LANG variable should I look for? (I'm not sure but I think I only saw one: it's value being nl_NL or something the like) if LANG=nl_NL then glibc (under linux) reads it's locale settings for nl_NL eg. DecimalSeparator := ','; ThousandSeparator := ' '; DateSeparator := '.'; ShortDateFormat := 'something' if LANG=en_US then DateSeparator := '/' etc ...etc ... SysUtils are not multiplatform in that case, so you have to use clocale unit. zeljko ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Code Folding mess and Code Divider feature
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 22:16, Martin Friebe laza...@mfriebe.de wrote: There is a general plan/idea to add some configuration (have to see how much) to define what you want to have foldable and what not. It wasn't seen as urgent yet (at least not by me...) Most (if not all) of the places that allow folding now, do so in Delphi as well. this is part of why they have been added, to make it easier for (ex-) Delphi users. Actually, at least in Delphi 2007 code folding works only down to classes and procedures, not below. Still, I think it is a good feature. IMHO most of the new ones are reasonable? - Except maybe for: Program / Unit and Implementation / interface; but they don't occur very often in a normal unit. - Maybe discussable are var Canost type blocks? Think is they can be very useful for bigger var sections (but I agree they can be irritating with just on line in it) - Folding at class / private / public = IMHO should be ok? - Folding at procedure in addition to the begin = arguable, if it should be instead of the begin? I'd say that such deep nesting should have very detailed configuration. I suggest to replace current numeric setting with a grid of checkboxes controlling code folding and divider drawing separately at logical levels: Level | Folding | Divider Unit/Program | Off | Off Section (interface/implementation/...) | On | Off Class/Object/Record Type Definition | On | On Class Visibility Specifier (public/private/...) | Off | Off Other Type Definition | On | Off Uses statement | On | Off Global var/property/const | On | On Procedure/Function/Method implementation | On | On Nested Procedure/Function | On | Off Local var/const | Off | Off Begin/end blocks | Off | Off Additionally, maybe for begin/end blocks a separate setting to turn folding on for blocks longer that N lines. The settings I above are my preferences, and I hope also reasonable defaults. -- Alexander S. Klenin ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Code Folding mess and Code Divider feature
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: In that case the first picture is wrong = with DDL=1 there should be no line between procedures (it would be at the end of the unit level.) Not sure if complete: DDL 1: unit level DDL 2: implementation/ interface DDL 3: Procedure implementation / class declaration ah, nice to actually know what each level means. :-) Maybe that should be place in the options screen instead of just numbers. In a program it differs from a unit, because you do not have the implementation/interface section. Include files may differ again. Those differences were always present, even with the older folding. The level only represents how many nested folds you have Unit: is the top level fold; not nested implementation/ interface: is nested in the unit fold procedures are nested into the implantation fold .. since you only switched tabs = did you aybe change config in your session? maybe the issue was that the config change was not set to all editors? That seems to be the partial cause. Setting the level to 3 gives the most desirable outcome I wanted. But only after I restarted Lazarus, did all the editors update. So there is one bug - not all editors get updated. Ok, I will check this part: proper propagation of config changes, with regards to divider fold level I then played with the levels to see how they differ. After changing the level, i did a Lazarus restart. It seems at Level = 2, I again get the same behaviour as the bug report. Even with a restart. So that seems to be another bug. Are all 3 files units? with unit keyword at the start, and implementation/interface sections if you have an include file, with no unit, no interface / implementation = then procedure is the top level fold (divider level = 1) I will need some feedback to reproduce this. Or if the behaviour is due to differences in the nesting structure, then the bug breaks down into: - propagation (see above) - restore the old behaviour that procedure divider lines, can be drawn independent of the fold-nest level. (they used to be top level, which is why they used to be content independent = that has changed) Best Regards Martin ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
[Lazarus] Stringgrid woes...
Hello, The stringgrid editor does the following: procedure TStringCellEditor.Change; begin inherited Change; if FGridnil then begin FGrid.SetEditText(FCol, FRow, Text); end; end; procedure TStringCellEditor.EditingDone; begin inherited EditingDone; if FGridnil then FGrid.EditingDone; end; This makes it completely impossible to do any checking of the entered values, because the SetEditText() event has no way of knowing when the editing ends. In my opinion, the SetEditText() should only be called when the editing is done, i.e. it should be like this: procedure TStringCellEditor.Change; begin inherited Change; end; procedure TStringCellEditor.EditingDone; begin inherited EditingDone; if FGridnil then begin FGrid.SetEditText(FCol, FRow, Text); FGrid.EditingDone; end; end; Imagine a stringgrid where you want to allow only real numbers in a cell. In that case you normally do 2 things: - Only allow numerals and decimal points in the OnKeyPress event - Only save the edit text when a valid number is entered, and give an error message if it is not valid. With the current situation, this is simply impossible, because of the following: 1. User types 1 - Settext receives 1 - all is well. 2. User types . - settext received 1. - error, because 1. is not a valid number. In other words, there is no way of knowing when you have received the final text that the user has entered. Is there a reason for the current behaviour, and can it be changed ? Michael. ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Code Folding mess and Code Divider feature
Stephano wrote: Martin Friebe wrote: There is a general plan/idea to add some configuration (have to see how much) to define what you want to have foldable and what not. It wasn't seen as urgent yet (at least not by me...) Most (if not all) of the places that allow folding now, do so in Delphi as well. this is part of why they have been added, to make it easier for (ex-) Delphi users. Is it possible have folding or more specifically identification for case/end pairs? Not yet. this will at earliest be implemented, when individual folds can be configured. The same applies for repeat/until It may also have to wait fro some more/other refactoring on the folding. The highlighting currently depends on the detection for folding. So it will be a while till that is done. The problem is that there are already units, that take more than one second to parse, and that can behave sluggish if you insert words like begin. So implementing this must be done with care. If you have an idea how to patch this, please feel free to discuss. Best Regards Martin ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] TProcess 2-way conversation
Thanks guys! Actually, as I sent it off I thought This isn't the best way of doing this and I thought I might get either a dignified lack of response or howls of derision! But I'm having great difficulty in stalling any of the Internet suites: lNet doesn't install because of a missing __front_type__ identifier ( http://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,6126.0.html ), Indy installs but it can't find the 'uses' code. ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Stringgrid woes...
Michael Van Canneyt wrote: ... Is there a reason for the current behaviour, and can it be changed ? With Delphi, I used to check the grid.EditorMode property in OnSetEditText handler, and skip all validations when EditorMode=true. Didn't check this with LCL, but there's a good chance it works. Regards, Sergei ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Code Folding mess and Code Divider feature
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 02:03, Martin Friebe laza...@mfriebe.de wrote: Not yet. this will at earliest be implemented, when individual folds can be configured. The same applies for repeat/until It may also have to wait fro some more/other refactoring on the folding. The highlighting currently depends on the detection for folding. I thought about it too when I composed the list in the previous message, but considered them overkill. If single-statement folds, like for 'case', 'with', 'if' etc. will be implemented, they should be able to merge with begin/end folds for their bodies, to avoid useless almost-duplicate folds. -- Alexander S. Klenin ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Stringgrid woes...
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009, Sergei Gorelkin wrote: Michael Van Canneyt wrote: ... Is there a reason for the current behaviour, and can it be changed ? With Delphi, I used to check the grid.EditorMode property in OnSetEditText handler, and skip all validations when EditorMode=true. Didn't check this with LCL, but there's a good chance it works. It doesn't, because Editormode is alwaus true in the OnSetEditText handler. I tested that. Also, during testing I discovered that setting EditorMode:=False; doesn't save the value, while IMHO it should. Apart from any workarounds around supposed bugs, calling SetText on each keystroke is IMHO also simply very inefficient (not to mention unnecessary) Michael. ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Stringgrid woes...
--- El vie 13-mar-09, Michael Van Canneyt michael.vancann...@wisa.be escribió: De:: Michael Van Canneyt michael.vancann...@wisa.be Asunto: [Lazarus] Stringgrid woes... A: Lazarus mailing list lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org Fecha: viernes, 13 marzo, 2009, 10:03 am Hello, [...] This makes it completely impossible to do any checking of the entered values, because the SetEditText() event has no way of knowing when the editing ends. In my opinion, the SetEditText() should only be called when the editing is done, i.e. it should be like this: procedure TStringCellEditor.Change; begin inherited Change; end; procedure TStringCellEditor.EditingDone; begin inherited EditingDone; if FGridnil then begin FGrid.SetEditText(FCol, FRow, Text); FGrid.EditingDone; end; end; This suggest that there should not be distinction between grid's OnSetEditText and OnEditingDone so why do we need both?. Imagine a stringgrid where you want to allow only real numbers in a cell. In that case you normally do 2 things: - Only allow numerals and decimal points in the OnKeyPress event - Only save the edit text when a valid number is entered, and give an error message if it is not valid. With the current situation, this is simply impossible, because of the following: 1. User types 1 - Settext receives 1 - all is well. 2. User types . - settext received 1. - error, because 1. is not a valid number. In other words, there is no way of knowing when you have received the final text that the user has entered. Is there a reason for the current behaviour, and can it be changed ? The grid behaves that way for the same reason there is a TEdit.OnChange event, I'm afraid there is no way to know that final text has been entered using this event. Is this different on Delphi? I would like to improve compatibility if it's not. If OnSetEditText is enough in Delphi to know when editing is finished then I think we should do it also. Currently the assumed way to know when the final text is entered is using OnEditingDone no OnSetEditText, maybe this is not working but I was aware that OnEditingDone was triggered for several causes not necesarily only when user ended editing, for this reason I usually do following on OnEditingDone of grid cells that need validation. if grid.Modified then begin [Do validation on col,row cell. Revert changes if not validated, etc] grid.Modified := false; end; this works only on StringGrid actually. Michael. __ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis! Regístrate ya - http://correo.yahoo.com.mx/ ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Stringgrid woes...
Jesus Reyes wrote: Is this different on Delphi? I would like to improve compatibility if it's not. If OnSetEditText is enough in Delphi to know when editing is finished then I think we should do it also. It appears to be different then. In Delphi, OnSetEditText is called multiple times during editing (with grid.EditorMode=True), and when the editing is complete, it is called once with grid.EditorMode=False. Sergei ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Inconsistent behavior of LabeledEdit boxes on different pages of a TabbedNotebook
Здравствуйте, david. In WinXP SP3 all right, except that color of edit changed, when Object Inspector lose focus. Вы писали 9 марта 2009 г., 19:12:05: Ok, the project is attached as test1.zip. If you need anything else, just let me know. Help is much appreciated! david -- С уважением, Cobalt747 mailto:cobalt...@mail.ru ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Stringgrid woes...
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009, Jesus Reyes wrote: This makes it completely impossible to do any checking of the entered values, because the SetEditText() event has no way of knowing when the editing ends. In my opinion, the SetEditText() should only be called when the editing is done, i.e. it should be like this: procedure TStringCellEditor.Change; begin inherited Change; end; procedure TStringCellEditor.EditingDone; begin inherited EditingDone; if FGridnil then begin FGrid.SetEditText(FCol, FRow, Text); FGrid.EditingDone; end; end; This suggest that there should not be distinction between grid's OnSetEditText and OnEditingDone so why do we need both?. Imagine a stringgrid where you want to allow only real numbers in a cell. In that case you normally do 2 things: - Only allow numerals and decimal points in the OnKeyPress event - Only save the edit text when a valid number is entered, and give an error message if it is not valid. With the current situation, this is simply impossible, because of the following: 1. User types 1 - Settext receives 1 - all is well. 2. User types . - settext received 1. - error, because 1. is not a valid number. In other words, there is no way of knowing when you have received the final text that the user has entered. Is there a reason for the current behaviour, and can it be changed ? The grid behaves that way for the same reason there is a TEdit.OnChange event, I'm afraid there is no way to know that final text has been entered using this event. Is this different on Delphi? I would like to improve compatibility if it's not. If OnSetEditText is enough in Delphi to know when editing is finished then I think we should do it also. Hm. Did some checking in delphi. It behaves the same. So better leave it as it is. Bad :( Oh well, now I know again why I don't want to use grids for editing. But customers disagree, unfortunately :( Currently the assumed way to know when the final text is entered is using OnEditingDone no OnSetEditText, maybe this is not working but I was aware that OnEditingDone was triggered for several causes not necesarily only when user ended editing, for this reason I usually do following on OnEditingDone of grid cells that need validation. if grid.Modified then begin [Do validation on col,row cell. Revert changes if not validated, etc] grid.Modified := false; end; The problem is that the actual data is not in the grid cells, so reverting it would not be that easy. Is there a way to force the grid to save the data ? That would help, actually... In Delphi, Setting EditorMode:=False; Saves the data (setedittext is called again). In Lazarus, it is not called. I think it would also be a good idea to have an event which helps to validate the data. Something like Procedure TForm1.ValidateEntry(Sender : TObject; ACol,ARow : Integer; Var Value : String); begin // Do some things, possibly modify Value or raise exception. end; Which is called only once, when the data is saved finally. Currently, it's hard to do proper validation in a grid. Well, in my opinion of course... Michael. ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Stringgrid woes...
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009, Sergei Gorelkin wrote: Jesus Reyes wrote: Is this different on Delphi? I would like to improve compatibility if it's not. If OnSetEditText is enough in Delphi to know when editing is finished then I think we should do it also. It appears to be different then. In Delphi, OnSetEditText is called multiple times during editing (with grid.EditorMode=True), and when the editing is complete, it is called once with grid.EditorMode=False. Not in delphi 7, I tested ? However, it is called when you set EditorMode explicitly to false. But never by itself. Michael. ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Placing a TProgressBar into a TStatusBar
Здравствуйте, Andrea. Try this: procedure TForm1.FormCreate(Sender: TObject); var ProgressBar1: TProgressBar; begin ProgressBar1:= TProgressBar.Create(StatusBar1); with ProgressBar1 do begin Parent := StatusBar1; Left := 50; Visible:= true; Height:=15; Width:=50; Max:=100; Position:=20; end; end; Вы писали 10 марта 2009 г., 19:01:27: Dear all, anyone can suggest me a way in order to place a TProgressBar into a TStatusBar? I found some tutorials but they are just for Delphi and Win. Thanks, Andrea -- С уважением, Cobalt747 mailto:cobalt...@mail.ru ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Code Folding mess and Code Divider feature
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009, Martin Friebe wrote: Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: Hi, This relates to the new bug report: http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=13322 Code Folding seems to have gone way overboard! It simply makes the editor look like a mess at the moment (Lazarus svn trunk revision). What is the end goal of code folding? Maybe is in the middle of the overall goal and I am simply acting to quickly. Either way, I will voice my concerns... There is a general plan/idea to add some configuration (have to see how much) to define what you want to have foldable and what not. It wasn't seen as urgent yet (at least not by me...) Most (if not all) of the places that allow folding now, do so in Delphi as well. this is part of why they have been added, to make it easier for (ex-) Delphi users. IMHO most of the new ones are reasonable? - Except maybe for: Program / Unit and Implementation / interface; but they don't occur very often in a normal unit. - Maybe discussable are var Canost type blocks? Think is they can be very useful for bigger var sections (but I agree they can be irritating with just on line in it) - Folding at class / private / public = IMHO should be ok? - Folding at procedure in addition to the begin = arguable, if it should be instead of the begin? Will be interested to see, if other people will voice opinions, which of the new foldings they like, which not As long as it can be switched off, you won't hear me complaining :-) Michael. ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Placing a TProgressBar into a TStatusBar
Thanks, it works. Just the Left property seems to have no effect, the ProgressBar is placed on the left corner ot the StatusBar1, like having Left:= 0. There's a way to associate a ProgressBar with a TStatusPanel? I tried using this code, but nothing happens: procedure TForm1.StatusBar1DrawPanel(StatusBar: TStatusBar; Panel: TStatusPanel; const Rect: TRect); begin if Panel = StatusBar.Panels[1] then with ProgressBar1 do begin Top := Rect.Top; Left := Rect.Left; Width := Rect.Right - Rect.Left - 5; Height := Rect.Bottom - Rect.Top; end; end; Regards, Andrea cobalt...@mail.ru ha scritto: Здравствуйте, Andrea. Try this: procedure TForm1.FormCreate(Sender: TObject); var ProgressBar1: TProgressBar; begin ProgressBar1:= TProgressBar.Create(StatusBar1); with ProgressBar1 do begin Parent := StatusBar1; Left := 50; Visible:= true; Height:=15; Width:=50; Max:=100; Position:=20; end; end; Вы писали 10 марта 2009 г., 19:01:27: Dear all, anyone can suggest me a way in order to place a TProgressBar into a TStatusBar? I found some tutorials but they are just for Delphi and Win. Thanks, Andrea -- Dr. Andrea Mauri, PhD Milano Chemometrics and QSAR Research Group Department of Environmental Sciences University of Milano-Bicocca P.zza della Scienza, 1 20126 Milano - Italy Tel: ++39 02 64482801 mailto:andrea.mauri...@gmail.com http://michem.disat.unimib.it/chm/ ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] SQLDB invalid handle
Dear Stephano, Stephano wrote: The following code produces an error: Could you please provide some more details? - FPC version - A minimal but complete test program demonstrating the error To ensure reproducibility of the problem, please report under which configuration of OS, DBMS and ODBC driver your minimal test program showed the problem. It would also be great if you had a stack trace (see http://wiki.freepascal.org/Creating_a_Backtrace_with_GDB). error is: could not prepare statement Last return code: SQL_INVALID_HANDLE Invalid handle passed to SQLGetDiagRec/Field So far I can see that the call to SQLPrepare failed (in TODBCConnection.PrepareStatement), but that unfortunately the ODBC error message could not be retrieved. Regards, Bram Kuijvenhoven ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Stringgrid woes...
--- El vie 13-mar-09, Michael Van Canneyt mich...@freepascal.org escribió: if grid.Modified then begin [Do validation on col,row cell. Revert changes if not validated, etc] grid.Modified := false; end; The problem is that the actual data is not in the grid cells, so reverting it would not be that easy. Is there a way to force the grid to save the data ? That would help, actually... if grid.Modified=true when OnEditingDone triggers, then the cell has been modified and the data is in cell (ok, that it could be any other cell which was modified it's true but that is a problem of program) and grid.cell[aCol,aRow] has the value. the only problem is that grid.Modified needs to be reset to false manually, other way the grid doesn't know when the is appropiated to set modified := true. In Delphi, Setting EditorMode:=False; Saves the data (setedittext is called again). In Lazarus, it is not called. I'm taking notes. I think it would also be a good idea to have an event which helps to validate the data. Something like Procedure TForm1.ValidateEntry(Sender : TObject; ACol,ARow : Integer; Var Value : String); begin // Do some things, possibly modify Value or raise exception. end; Which is called only once, when the data is saved finally. Currently, it's hard to do proper validation in a grid. Well, in my opinion of course... I thought the same and that's why I introduced grid.modified which has served me very well. But I agree that an event to do validation would be best, I will try to do something about it. Michael. Jesus Reyes A. __ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis! Regístrate ya - http://correo.yahoo.com.mx/ ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Stringgrid woes...
Michael Van Canneyt wrote: Not in delphi 7, I tested ? However, it is called when you set EditorMode explicitly to false. But never by itself. Yep, I was wrong, details tend to become forgotten with time :( But only partially. It is called when you finish editing by pressing Enter, or by moving current cell with the keyboard, or by activating another control. It is not called when you finish editing by mouse click elsewhere in the grid. Sergei ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] TProcess 2-way conversation
Hi Vincent,
2009/3/13 Vincent Snijders vsnijd...@vodafonevast.nl:
See the process example:
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Executing_External_Programs#Using_input_and_output_of_a_TProcess
and
https://lazarus-ccr.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/lazarus-ccr/examples/process/
Vincent
That was the article on which I based my code.
I'm not having much luck.
PLink.CommandLine := plink.exe -ssh -pw
'+options.Values['Password']+' -batch
'+options.Values['User']+'@'+options.Values['Server'];
Plink.Options := [poUsePipes];
Memo1.Append('-- executing --');
PLink.Execute;
M.SetSize(BytesRead + READ_BYTES);
n := PLink.Output.Read((M.Memory + BytesRead)^, READ_BYTES);
if n 0 then
begin
S.LoadFromStream(M);
for i:=0 to S.Count-1 do
begin
Memo1.Lines.Append(S[i]);
end;
end
else
begin
Memo1.Lines.Append('Unable to open '+options.Values['Server']);
end;
remoteCommand:='ls -l'+#10;
plink.input.write(remoteCommand[1],length(remoteCommand));
M.SetSize(BytesRead + READ_BYTES);
n := PLink.Output.Read((M.Memory + BytesRead)^, READ_BYTES);
if n 0 then
begin
S.LoadFromStream(M);
for i:=0 to S.Count-1 do
begin
Memo1.Lines.Append(S[i]);
end;
end;
I would expect the output of 'ls -l' to give me quite a lot of
information but S.LoadFromStream(M); doesn't contain anything at all.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Placing a TProgressBar into a TStatusBar
Здравствуйте, Andrea. I think, now it is no way to associate some control with TCollectionItem-descendant like TStatusPanel I make it with OnResize event by updating it's coordinates. Вы писали 14 марта 2009 г., 0:02:36: Thanks, it works. Just the Left property seems to have no effect, the ProgressBar is placed on the left corner ot the StatusBar1, like having Left:= 0. There's a way to associate a ProgressBar with a TStatusPanel? I tried using this code, but nothing happens: procedure TForm1.StatusBar1DrawPanel(StatusBar: TStatusBar; Panel: TStatusPanel; const Rect: TRect); begin if Panel = StatusBar.Panels[1] then with ProgressBar1 do begin Top := Rect.Top; Left := Rect.Left; Width := Rect.Right - Rect.Left - 5; Height := Rect.Bottom - Rect.Top; end; end; -- С уважением, Cobalt747 mailto:cobalt...@mail.ru ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
