Op Tue, 11 Sep 2012, schreef Alexander Klenin:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Jonas Maebe wrote:
If you want to do that, you need to add a layer in between that converts the
sets into integer bitmasks in a reliable, portable and future-proof way.
How about packed sets? Do they have wel
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
> If you want to do that, you need to add a layer in between that converts the
> sets into integer bitmasks in a reliable, portable and future-proof way.
>
How about packed sets? Do they have well-defined memory layout? If
not, then maybe the
On 10 Sep 2012, at 23:42, Daniël Mantione wrote:
> Op Mon, 10 Sep 2012, schreef Jonas Maebe:
>
>> You can explicitly define the ordinal values of enumerations if you depend
>> on that sort of stuff (which afaik the Qt units in fact do).
>
> That's a rewriting of history, as we invented that fe
Op Mon, 10 Sep 2012, schreef Jonas Maebe:
On 10 Sep 2012, at 23:12, Daniël Mantione wrote:
Op Mon, 10 Sep 2012, schreef Jonas Maebe:
If you want to do that, you need to add a layer in between that converts the
sets into integer bitmasks in a reliable, portable and future-proof way.
Yes
On 10 Sep 2012, at 23:12, Daniël Mantione wrote:
> Op Mon, 10 Sep 2012, schreef Jonas Maebe:
>
>> If you want to do that, you need to add a layer in between that converts the
>> sets into integer bitmasks in a reliable, portable and future-proof way.
>
> Yes! Let's also convert integers to enu
Op Mon, 10 Sep 2012, schreef Jonas Maebe:
If you want to do that, you need to add a layer in between that converts
the sets into integer bitmasks in a reliable, portable and future-proof
way.
Yes! Let's also convert integers to enums with a case statement rather
than typecast, just in case
On 10 Sep 2012, at 22:58, Daniël Mantione wrote:
> Op Mon, 10 Sep 2012, schreef Jonas Maebe:
>
>> No, sets are an opaque data type. Their internal format is undefined.
>
> I knew you would answer to that :) While, I disagree that a set is opaque,
> but, we can skip that discussion. What's goin
Op Mon, 10 Sep 2012, schreef Jonas Maebe:
On 10 Sep 2012, at 22:06, Daniël Mantione wrote:
On Monday 10 September 2012 20:18:52 Vincent Snijders wrote:
If it is the combination of enum, then the type of the parameter is set of
enum.
Ahum, I am talking about passing combinations of enums v
On 10 Sep 2012, at 20:03, Den Jean wrote:
> As described in
> http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=22797
>
> fpc 2.7.1 does not allow anymore to pass an enum
> to a function expecting integers.
This has never been allowed. The only thing that was allowed was defining an
enum as a default va
On 10 Sep 2012, at 22:06, Daniël Mantione wrote:
>> On Monday 10 September 2012 20:18:52 Vincent Snijders wrote:
>>> If it is the combination of enum, then the type of the parameter is set of
>>> enum.
>> Ahum, I am talking about passing combinations of enums values
>> (usually bitmasks, assigned
In our previous episode, Dani?l Mantione said:
> > On Monday 10 September 2012 20:18:52 Vincent Snijders wrote:
> >> If it is the combination of enum, then the type of the parameter is set of
> >> enum.
> > Ahum, I am talking about passing combinations of enums values
> > (usually bitmasks, assigne
Op Mon, 10 Sep 2012, schreef Den Jean:
On Monday 10 September 2012 20:18:52 Vincent Snijders wrote:
If it is the combination of enum, then the type of the parameter is set of
enum.
Ahum, I am talking about passing combinations of enums values
(usually bitmasks, assigned enums, some assigned
On Monday 10 September 2012 20:18:52 Vincent Snijders wrote:
> If it is the combination of enum, then the type of the parameter is set of
> enum.
Ahum, I am talking about passing combinations of enums values
(usually bitmasks, assigned enums, some assigned enums
are already combinations of other) t
2012/9/10 Den Jean :
> Hi,
>
> As described in
> http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=22797
>
> fpc 2.7.1 does not allow anymore to pass an enum
> to a function expecting integers.
>
> Note that there has always been a
> {$MINENUMSIZE 4} in qt4.pas
>
> Is this intended behaviour ? I really hope i
Hi,
As described in
http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=22797
fpc 2.7.1 does not allow anymore to pass an enum
to a function expecting integers.
Note that there has always been a
{$MINENUMSIZE 4} in qt4.pas
Is this intended behaviour ? I really hope it is not.
I cannot define the type of t
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
> Afaik there was some comment later in that thread that the makefiles
> sometimes detect
> windows by the semicomma's in the PATH.
>
> Try to add ;c:\windows\system or so to your path line.
Nice, that fixes the problem too =) Strange th
In our previous episode, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho said:
> wrote:
> > but I have:
> >
> > SET PATH=C:\Programas\lazarus31\fpc\2.6.1\bin\i386-win32
> >
> > And the file C:\Programas\lazarus31\fpc\2.6.1\bin\i386-win32\pwd.exe does
> > exist
>
> I think I found the problem. It seams that building
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
wrote:
> but I have:
>
> SET PATH=C:\Programas\lazarus31\fpc\2.6.1\bin\i386-win32
>
> And the file C:\Programas\lazarus31\fpc\2.6.1\bin\i386-win32\pwd.exe does
> exist
I think I found the problem. It seams that building fails if my sou
Mattias Gaertner wrote on Mon, 10 Sep 2012:
Since revision 22341 various strange crashes appear in Lazarus and
applications (Windows and Linux). See
http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=22842
Log entry says:
r22341 | florian | 2012-09-06 17:11:58 +0200 (Thu, 06 Sep 2012) | 1 line
* when cr
Hi,
Since revision 22341 various strange crashes appear in Lazarus and
applications (Windows and Linux). See
http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=22842
Log entry says:
r22341 | florian | 2012-09-06 17:11:58 +0200 (Thu, 06 Sep 2012) | 1 line
* when creating method pointers, put them into regis
20 matches
Mail list logo
