Hi,
I use FPCUnit extensively at work and in open source projects like
tiOPF, but I hit a bit of a snag - actually a bug in FPCUnit which
causes many tests to fail for the wrong reasons. Here is one such case
- in the tiOPF project many database tests fail do to "Setup Once"
issues: http://opensof
> * DUnit2 (hosted in the tiOPF code repository and written by the
> late Peter McNab) has some major improvements over the existing DUnit.
> Do we incorporate/port that, or merge the DUnit2 code into a new
> testing framework that is FPC and Delphi compatible?
For those that don't know about DU
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
> compatibility methods, but some things are not possible.
> * DUnit2 (hosted in the tiOPF code repository and written by the
> late Peter McNab) has some major improvements over the existing DUnit.
> Do we incorporate/port that, or merge the DUnit
Hi all,
On Fedora 11 there are some issues with the ld-version. First of all
it's impossible to cycle the compiler using the --build-id flag, because
it generates different id's for each run, so that ppc3 and ppcx64 will
always differ. I'm trying to fix this.
But another issue is that it always c
On Tue, 19 May 2009, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Hi,
I use FPCUnit extensively at work and in open source projects like
tiOPF, but I hit a bit of a snag - actually a bug in FPCUnit which
causes many tests to fail for the wrong reasons. Here is one such case
- in the tiOPF project many database t
On 19 May 2009, at 14:04, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
But another issue is that it always complains while compiling:
/usr/bin/ld: warning: link.res contains output sections; did you
forget -T?
This is a new warning that was added to ld.
What does it mean? Does fpc something special with o
On 19 May 2009, at 14:06, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I'm afraid I have seriously bad experiences with interfaces in FPC
How so? I'm not aware of any outstanding bugs with interfaces in FPC.
Even the compiler uses them now (only for whole-program optimization
though, so usually you won't t
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
>
> Is it FPC license compatible? DUnit always had the problem it was MPL.
Umm, I had a look and the code is a fork of the original DUnit, so
DUnit2 still falls under the MPL license.
Regards,
- Graeme -
_
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
>
> For me, a rewrite is the preferred option.
OK, could you then please list all the things that bug you in the
current FPCUnit, so we don't duplicate the issues.
> It should not affect thim, this should be a dogma...
> After the fix,
On Tue, 19 May 2009, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 19 May 2009, at 14:06, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I'm afraid I have seriously bad experiences with interfaces in FPC
How so? I'm not aware of any outstanding bugs with interfaces in FPC. Even
the compiler uses them now (only for whole-program op
On Tue, 19 May 2009, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
For me, a rewrite is the preferred option.
OK, could you then please list all the things that bug you in the
current FPCUnit, so we don't duplicate the issues.
The main issue is tha
On 19 May 2009, at 14:53, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 19 May 2009, at 14:06, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I'm afraid I have seriously bad experiences with interfaces in FPC
How so? I'm not aware of any outstanding bugs with interfaces in
FPC. Eve
Graeme Geldenhuys pravi:
> Hi,
>
> I use FPCUnit extensively at work and in open source projects like
> tiOPF, but I hit a bit of a snag - actually a bug in FPCUnit which
> causes many tests to fail for the wrong reasons. Here is one such case
> - in the tiOPF project many database tests fail do to
On Tue, 19 May 2009, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 19 May 2009, at 14:53, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 19 May 2009, at 14:06, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I'm afraid I have seriously bad experiences with interfaces in FPC
How so? I'm not aware of any ou
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
> http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=12778
Indeed, that is a very handy feature of using interfaces. I'm glad you
mentioned it, otherwise I was going to have some issues with my tiOPF
MVP implementation, which I planed on being inte
In our previous episode, Jonas Maebe said:
>
> > I'm afraid I have seriously bad experiences with interfaces in FPC
>
> How so? I'm not aware of any outstanding bugs with interfaces in FPC.
> Even the compiler uses them now (only for whole-program optimization
> though, so usually you won't t
Op dinsdag 19-05-2009 om 14:42 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Jonas
Maebe:
> On 19 May 2009, at 14:04, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
>
> > But another issue is that it always complains while compiling:
> >
> > /usr/bin/ld: warning: link.res contains output sections; did you
> > forget -T?
>
> This
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
>
> Well, e.g.
>
> http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=12778
More a delegation problem. Together with 8951 and the pretty old 4842
> Another point was trying to get the Mozilla API working. All code works in
> Delphi, but fails horribly in
In our previous episode, Joost van der Sluis said:
> > way. The warning was added because you seldom want to append your own
> > linker script to the default one.
> >
> > However, I don't know whether it's intentional or not that FPC does
> > not override ld's default internal linker script, s
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Dean Zobec wrote:
> The Setup and Teardown run only once for a set of tests goes against the
> philosophy of unit testing actually, as violates the priciple that all
> the unit tests should be independent from each other.
The tests in tiOPF are independent of each
> In our previous episode, Joost van der Sluis said:
>> > way. The warning was added because you seldom want to append your own
>> > linker script to the default one.
>> >
>> > However, I don't know whether it's intentional or not that FPC does
>> > not override ld's default internal linker script,
On 19 May 2009, at 15:45, Peter Vreman wrote:
The linker scripts without the full SECTIONS details are only used
to reduce the length and
complexity of the commandline.
This is about the linker scripts /with/ SECTIONS details. That's what
the warning is about: there are SECTIONS details i
Hi
Regarding bug #12778
http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=12778
Like I said before, I am no expert in using Interfaces. But why can't
I do the following (see code below), which works perfectly when I run
the program. Using delegation define or usecorba define in any
combination. It's the
>> The linker scripts without the full SECTIONS details are only used
>> to reduce the length and
>> complexity of the commandline.
>
> This is about the linker scripts /with/ SECTIONS details. That's what
> the warning is about: there are SECTIONS details in a file not
> specified via -T, and ther
On Tue, 19 May 2009, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Hi
Regarding bug #12778
http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=12778
Like I said before, I am no expert in using Interfaces. But why can't
I do the following (see code below), which works perfectly when I run
the program. Using delegation defi
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
>
> The difference is that you have access to the THook methods/properties.
> THook just 'happens' also to implement the interface you need.
Ah, I get it now. So with delegation of a class you get two-in-one.
Access to the class methods
26 matches
Mail list logo