Hi!
Several packages have been added recently. I would like to urge people to
be a bit more strict on the licensing issue, i.e. the md4 unit contains
this message:
Unix SMB/CIFS implementation.
a implementation of MD4 designed for use in the SMB authentication protocol
Copyright (C) Andre
Helmut Hartl schrieb:
Hello Developers,
Are there any news regarding bug 07281?
Hmm, I thought it was fixed :) Will look into it.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Hello Developers,
Are there any news regarding bug 07281?
I think this bug is closely related to bug 7209.
The problem is that it is not possible with any
compilers greater 2.0.2 to compile
a memory stable program that uses interfaces.
We would like to release Zeos Dataset
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Micha Nelissen wrote:
I see. I do wonder how many people use their own heap manager though
;-).
cmem? sharemem?
Of course, but does C free support a size parameter ?
Micha
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepasc
Micha Nelissen wrote:
> Daniël Mantione wrote:
>>> I think no recent heap manager can free blocks partially ?
>>
>> I think the idea is that if you want, you can write and install a heap
>> manager that uses the size. In such case you implement
>> freemem(pointer,size), and freemem(pointer) then re
> Daniël Mantione wrote:
>>> I think no recent heap manager can free blocks partially ?
>>
>> I think the idea is that if you want, you can write and install a heap
>> manager that uses the size. In such case you implement
>> freemem(pointer,size), and freemem(pointer) then results in a runtime
>>
Daniël Mantione wrote:
The difference is of scientific meaning. If there were no negative zero,
the precision around zero would be halved.
While true, its precision would be the same as the precision "around"
all other numbers.
0 = -0.5 .. 0.4
1 = 0.5 .. 1.4
2 = 1.5 .. 2.4 etc...
Micha
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 03:24:14PM +0200, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
> Andrea Mauri wrote:
> > Jonas Maebe wrote:
> >>
> >> Not only that, but -0.000 is different from 0.000 (at least for the fpu)
> >>
> >>
> >> Jonas
> > In a mathematical way of view I think that -0.000 has no meaning.
It does it me
On 13 okt 2006, at 10:31, Micha Nelissen wrote:
Jonas Maebe wrote:
heaptrc checks the size parameter if one is given, and gives a run
time error if the size does not match the size given at allocation
time.
Hmm interesting. So 2.1.1 compiled with heaptrace should give this
runtime error
Jonas Maebe wrote:
heaptrc checks the size parameter if one is given, and gives a run time
error if the size does not match the size given at allocation time.
Hmm interesting. So 2.1.1 compiled with heaptrace should give this
runtime error, if my original post is correct.
Micha
_
On 13 okt 2006, at 10:05, Micha Nelissen wrote:
Daniël Mantione wrote:
I think no recent heap manager can free blocks partially ?
I think the idea is that if you want, you can write and install a
heap manager that uses the size. In such case you implement freemem
(pointer,size), and freemem
Daniël Mantione wrote:
I think no recent heap manager can free blocks partially ?
I think the idea is that if you want, you can write and install a heap
manager that uses the size. In such case you implement
freemem(pointer,size), and freemem(pointer) then results in a runtime
error.
I see
Op Fri, 13 Oct 2006, schreef Micha Nelissen:
> Daniël Mantione wrote:
> > No, it is a concious decision and Delphi compatible. The TP heap manager
> > did not store the size of a block, so the size parameter was necessary.
> > It was also possible to free only parts of blocks.
> >
> > This is n
Daniël Mantione wrote:
No, it is a concious decision and Delphi compatible. The TP heap manager
did not store the size of a block, so the size parameter was necessary.
It was also possible to free only parts of blocks.
This is not possible with the FPC heap manager, it frees the entire heap
b
Op Fri, 13 Oct 2006, schreef Micha Nelissen:
> Peter Vreman wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > At cutils line 926, FreeMem is called for p with size strlen(p)+1.
> > > Could
> > > it be that actually a much bigger block was allocated, and not size
> > > strlen(p)+1 ?
> >
> > The size parameter is ig
Peter Vreman wrote:
Hi,
At cutils line 926, FreeMem is called for p with size strlen(p)+1. Could
it be that actually a much bigger block was allocated, and not size
strlen(p)+1 ?
The size parameter is ignored by the heap manager.
That's two bugs, then :).
Micha
_
> Hi,
>
> At cutils line 926, FreeMem is called for p with size strlen(p)+1. Could
> it be that actually a much bigger block was allocated, and not size
> strlen(p)+1 ?
The size parameter is ignored by the heap manager.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fp
17 matches
Mail list logo
