Re: [Lazarus] Promoting Lazarus: A Case Study Video
On 02/16/2015 11:29 AM, Giuliano Colla wrote: Il 16/02/2015 04:47, Den ha scritto: It also plays for me, Ubuntu 14.10 64bit, Chrome. Thanks to all for the feedback. Given other's experience, I tested with Linux-FC14 and it works for me too. It must be a CentOs 6 specific issue. Most likely a decoder is missing, because it isn't strictly Open Source. RH is very accurate in providing only purely OS software. Sometimes it's a nuisance. I'll investigate. It's not because of open source-ness, but due to patents. The H.264 codec is heavily patented in the United States and other countries and requires an expensive license fee to use: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Patent_licensing Free browsers such as Firefox only provide H.264 playback capability, if the underlying OS has the codec installed. So, it only works in Windows and Android, because Microsoft and Google have paid the license fees for distributing the codec with the OS. If you want to support free operating systems, it's better to also provide WebM or Ogg/Theora versions of the video: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theora Unfortunately, there are some very popular devices (e.g. the iPhone and the iPad) that *only* support H.264 and that don't allow you to install other codecs, so if you want the best compatibility, you need two versions for every video - one H.264 and one WebM or Ogg/Theora :( Nikolay -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] free Pascal versions
On 03/03/2014 03:21 PM, Malcolm Buckingham wrote: I've not tried it but this looks like it might be what you are looking for http://math.ubbcluj.ro/~sberinde/wingraph/ http://math.ubbcluj.ro/%7Esberinde/wingraph/ Or ptcgraph, which is included in FPC and runs on linux as well as windows. Nikolay -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Need Windows CE OS Image
On 01/18/2014 08:53 AM, sanmiolade wrote: I am trying to test run my WINCE Apps I need a Emulator and Windows CE 5.0 or 6.0 OS Images Kindly send it to me the MSDN sites is all crap. Here's the Windows Mobile 6 SDK, which contains emulator images: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=6135 and here's version 6.5: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=17284 Nikolay -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Graeme would love this, or not, I think
On 10/11/2013 10:18 PM, vfclists . wrote: You couldn't make this up. Is it a joke or not? Department of Basic Education bans Free and Open Source Software in SA Schools and mandates programming an ancient, moribund language in contradiction of government's own policy http://twitter.com/share http://dkeats.com/index.php?module=blogaction=viewsinglepostid=gen21Srv8Nme0_40332_1381256759userid=7050120123 E: Python, PHP, Java, Javascript... any 21st Century language would be better than Delphi. Any. Any at all. I just don't know what to say... Nikolay -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Why development remains constant for msdos?
On 09/25/2013 11:26 AM, Michael Schnell wrote: On 09/24/2013 10:58 AM, Nikolay Nikolov wrote: When you try to create a thread, your program terminates and writes a message that threading is not supported. While this absolutely does make sense, one could think about alternatives. AFAIK, (at least for some archs) there is a variant of the pthread (=POSIX thread) library, that internally does user-land multithreading. IIRC, the original POSIX definition was done with exactly this in mind and, regarding Linux, the original Linux implementations (aka Linux Threads) was not fully compatible with POSIX. Only some years ago, the Linux changed it's way of Kernel-based thread handling to the POSIX compatible NPTL implementation. Thus it should be possible to link fpc projects to a user-land thread enabled version of pthreadlib and allow for working with TThread in DOS. I've actually thought about implementing some sort of multithreading for DOS for a long time. The problems are the following: 1) DOS functions are not reetrant and are thus not safe to call from different threads. There's an undocumented InDOS flag that indicates whether a DOS function is safe to call: http://stanislavs.org/helppc/int_21-34.html But the RTL currently doesn't check it before every call and normally it's only used when writing TSRs. 2) In DPMI protected mode applications (such as go32v2), you cannot modify the return address from within an interrupt handler, which means you cannot implement your task scheduler as a timer interrupt handler, because you won't be able to switch to a different context from there. Doing this would require modifications to the DPMI host (cwsdpmi.exe) and will not work if another DPMI host is active (such as when running in a windows dos prompt, etc.) 3) Even if you solve 2), DPMI requires that all code and data touched from an interrupt handler to be locked, so that it cannot be swapped out. This is a tedious and error prone task to do from a high level language such as pascal. You should ensure that your entire scheduler's code and data are locked. An alternative option is to switch to a DPMI host, that doesn't support swapping (i.e. cwsdpr0.exe), but then you lose the virtual memory support (and thus the ability to run on machines that don't have enough memory). 2) and 3) do not apply to 16-bit MS-DOS. Another option is to implement cooperative multitasking, which would require each thread to call periodically an yield function. This solves 1), 2) and 3), but threaded code written for other OSes will require modifications to run under DOS. However, that's still better than not running at all. Nikolay -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Why development remains constant for msdos?
On 25.9.2013 г. 14:01 ч., Michael Schnell wrote: More than 15 Years ago I on DOS did do the first tests for my preemptive multitasking library (in C), that that finally works (up til now) in an 68K product. :-) Real mode or DPMI? IMHO, real mode is doable, DPMI - not so much (at least not without using a certain DPMI host with special modifications). Nikolay -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Why development remains constant for msdos?
On 25.9.2013 г. 14:14 ч., Michael Schnell wrote: On 09/25/2013 01:00 PM, Nikolay Nikolov wrote: Real mode or DPMI? IMHO, real mode is doable, DPMI - not so much (at least not without using a certain DPMI host with special modifications). Did DPMI even exist at this time ? 15 years ago is 1998, so yes. Maybe it was even earlier? IIRC it was a native 8088 chip - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_8088 Real mode it is, then. DPMI requires 286+ and the DOS extender that FPC uses is 386+. Borland Pascal 7 had a 16-bit (286+) DPMI dos extender. We can implement that as well, as soon as the i8086 large memory model is finished. The Open Watcom linker we're using already supports the DOS/16M extender binary format I think. Nikolay -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Why development remains constant for msdos?
On 24.9.2013 г. 10:42, Michael Schnell wrote: On 09/22/2013 10:40 PM, wkitt...@windstream.net wrote: yes, there are still quitet many DOS systems out there... there's even freeDOS and similar FOSS(?) DOS projects... some of them are even 32bit and can use all available memory like other OSes of today ;) How does fpc for DOS handle TThread ? Just curious... When you try to create a thread, your program terminates and writes a message that threading is not supported. Things like threadvar work in the sense that they compile and work, but since you don't have threads, they behave just like regular vars. Underneath they still generate the extra bloat needed for threadvars (e.g. calls to FPC_THREADVAR_RELOCATE, which are probably stubs and do nothing in the rtl) Nikolay -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Why development remains constant for msdos?
On 09/24/2013 12:17 PM, Sven Barth wrote: Am 24.09.2013 10:58, schrieb Nikolay Nikolov: On 24.9.2013 г. 10:42, Michael Schnell wrote: How does fpc for DOS handle TThread ? Just curious... When you try to create a thread, your program terminates and writes a message that threading is not supported. Things like threadvar work in the sense that they compile and work, but since you don't have threads, they behave just like regular vars. Underneath they still generate the extra bloat needed for threadvars (e.g. calls to FPC_THREADVAR_RELOCATE, which are probably stubs and do nothing in the rtl) Maybe we should adjust the compiler that it treats threadvars really like normal vars if the target does not support threading... Yes, that's a good idea and in fact I was planning to do it, since it'll save precious space in the i8086 small and tiny memory models (and perhaps the embedded targets also), but I still haven't done it, due to other things with higher priority. Nikolay -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Why development remains constant for msdos?
On 22.9.2013 г. 14:59 ч., Florian Klämpfl wrote: Am 22.09.2013 13:46, schrieb Junior: Why development remains constant for msdos? Because somebody wants to do so. No more, no less. As the person working on the i8086-msdos port, here's the story how it all started: I wanted to learn how FPC code generators work by porting it to a new architecture, but I didn't have any computer in my home with a CPU that isn't supported already (well, except for 6502 :) ). So porting to a new architecture would require buying some exotic hardware from eBay (say, an Itanium or SPARC64) that'll likely be already obsolete in a few years anyway. And one day it occurred to me that I could try an i8086 port. It seemed perfect to me for the following reasons: 1) while, you may consider 16-bit x86 dead, it never really died in the sense that every modern x86 processor (including 64-bit ones) supports it in real mode. In fact, unless you have an UEFI system, 16-bit code is always executed at some point during the boot process, because that's how the BIOS boots the system - it loads the first sector from the hard disk at address h:7C00h and jumps to it in 16-bit real mode. In fact, modern machines are able to boot DOS and it works without issues. If it didn't, boot loaders of modern operating systems wouldn't work either. So, in 5 years, everybody will have a machine that is able to execute i8086 code (and thus, able to test and maintain the port), but that may not be the case for e.g. Itanium or SPARC64. Also, there are plenty of virtual machines available, where you can install DOS and test it. There's also DOSBox. In fact, you can run the FPC testsuite for i8086-msdos on any 32-bit or 64-bit linux _or_ windows via DOSBox. 2) I didn't need to learn an entirely new instruction set and OS API, since I'm already familiar with them, so I could focus only on the compiler itself. 3) There isn't a 16-bit x86 pascal compiler that is free/open source. Borland Pascal is proprietary and while you can download old versions for free from the Embarcadero museum site, the latest version available gratis is 5.5. You can't legally use 7.0, unless you bought it back then and even if you did, you don't have the sources to the compiler, so you can't fix bugs in it and improve it. 4) Since x86 compatibility goes all the way back to 16-bit, if FPC would support it could claim to be the first compiler which supports the full x86 range going all the way from 16-bit up to 64-bit. It's something unique and cool :) OpenWatcom may be the only other compiler that is able to do it, since they haven't dropped 16-bit support and are supposedly working on 64-bit, but their 64-bit port is still not ready AFAIK. And of course GCC and LLVM are extremely unlikely to do such a crazy thing as a 16-bit port. :) It all started semi-seriously, I just wanted to see how difficult it would be to do the port, but I soon reached the point of no return, where I had almost got it working and I just had to keep working on it in order to get that next feature going, etc. And also, I'm having a lot of fun, while working on it. I also bought some vintage 16-bit machines from eBay for the extra fun and motivation :) As for people still using DOS, there's still a community of people using it for fun or for nostalgia reasons. Check out: http://www.bttr-software.de/forum/forum.php There's also the FreeDOS project, which was already mentioned by another poster: http://www.freedos.org/ Also note that DOS has always been supported by FPC via the go32v2 dos extender (ok, it might have been go32v1 when fpc was started), but it has always been 32-bit and thus requiring at least a 386. Only the 16-bit DOS support is new. Nikolay -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Why development remains constant for msdos?
On 09/23/2013 10:14 PM, Kostas Michalopoulos wrote: On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 4:47 PM, Nikolay Nikolov nick...@gmail.com mailto:nick...@gmail.com wrote: OpenWatcom may be the only other compiler that is able to do it, since they haven't dropped 16-bit support and are supposedly working on 64-bit, but their 64-bit port is still not ready AFAIK. FWIW, there is an OpenWatcom fork which is under more active development than the main one and has 64bit support there: http://sourceforge.net/projects/openwatcom/. I haven't tried the 64bit support myself though. Interesting. I didn't know about it. From the features list: DOS version of tools now support long file names (LFN) if appropriate LFN driver is loaded by DOS Maybe we could use their linker for our go32v2 hosted crosscompiler to i8086. Nikolay -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Power Off/Restart a PC
On 04/07/2011 04:08 PM, Fábio Henrique de Souza wrote: Hi all, How to power off and restart a computer with Lazarus? (cross-platform or Windows and Linux) For Windows, use the ExitWindowsEx function: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa376868%28v=vs.85%29.aspx -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] Is it possible to create a loop
On 10/03/2010 09:01 PM, Bizugo wrote:
Is possible to create a loop using a code like this one:
for var J: integer = X to Y do {...}
No, but if you're using Lazarus and want to save typing, you can write:
for I := 1 to 10 do
and then press Ctrl+Shift+C and it will automatically add I: Integer to
your local variable list, so you can write it just as fast, and most
importantly, without the need to move the cursor back to the variable list.
--
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] IOI: Lazarus and Free Pascal
Saw that it was posted in latest news on the free pascal site. :) Just noticed a small typo - his name should be Henadzi - with a 'z'. -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Re: [Lazarus] IOI: Lazarus and Free Pascal
On 08/16/2009 08:12 PM, Den Jean wrote: Hi, International Olympiad in Informatics allows only c++ and free pascal. Provided editors : ... lazarus ... http://www.ioi2009.org/index.jsp;jsessionid=F84941DF0A0EE4138BC2E44BA6DBE5EB?ln=2id=361 I was on the Host Technical Committee: http://www.ioi2009.org/index.jsp?id=408ln=2 where I helped with the Pascal support (install configuration of fpc and lazarus on the contest linux distro, etc.). I also did a Pascal to C translation of one of the authors' solutions of one of the hardest tasks in order to help determine the time limits for the task, so that it is possible to score 100 points on the task with Pascal. Surprisingly, the Pascal program ran exactly as fast as the C program (the difference was really really minimal and it was slightly slower on some tests, but slightly faster on others). And here's the kicker: the winner - Henadzi Karatkevich (who is only 14-years old!!!) from Belarus used Pascal to solve the tasks! http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/08/15/1523255/14-Year-Old-Wins-International-Programming-Contest?from=rss -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
