Hi,
There is bug http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=21091
which was fixed in 2.7.1 in rev.20734
And there are waiting unmerged revisions
http://www.stack.nl/~marcov/mergelogs26/compiler.html
Will these be merged ?
If not all, can this one be backported ?
Thanks
-Laco.
___
Thanks guys, I'll move the discussion to the "other" list.
I was going to write more, but I'll leave it for the time being.
Thanks for your valuable help and perspectives.
Pete
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.fre
On 27 Sep 12, at 1:56, Cephas Atheos wrote:
.
.
> I hope this makes sense. And I do hope everyone's taking my attitude in
> the spirit it's intended, I'm not trying to be a bastard, really. I know
> you guys can pull all this together, you really don't need me to tell you
> this. But I'm gonna ke
2012/9/26 Cephas Atheos :
> On 27/09/12 12:42 AM, "Vincent Snijders"
> wrote:
>
>>2012/9/26 Cephas Atheos :
>>> What
>>> would _you_ want to be able to do in one click (or less)?
>>
>>Go to http://svn.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/
>
> ! That scared the HELL out of me! :D
>
> Oh my goo
is there any plan about supporting PPAPI ?
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
On 27/09/12 1:11 AM, "Sven Barth" wrote:
>This (although I'm mostly using URL completion for it...) and the
>following:
>* http://wiki.freepascal.org/
>* http://www.freepascal.org/docs.var
>* ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/snapshot/trunk/
>* http://bugs.freepascal.org
Oh, Sven, Sven, Sven I a
On 27/09/12 12:42 AM, "Vincent Snijders"
wrote:
>2012/9/26 Cephas Atheos :
>> What
>> would _you_ want to be able to do in one click (or less)?
>
>Go to http://svn.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/
! That scared the HELL out of me! :D
Oh my goodness, that's a huge scary webpage. Nobody
On 2012-09-26 16:18, Kostas Michalopoulos wrote:
It should run only as an easter egg when you move the mouse over it,
not all the time :-P
I feel like I went back in time to the early 90's every time I see that.
Those animations were the "in thing" then. :)
Regards,
- Graeme -
__
It should run only as an easter egg when you move the mouse over it,
not all the time :-P
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Sven Barth wrote:
> Am 26.09.2012 16:26, schrieb Cephas Atheos:
>
>> Kostas and Doug, I agree that even a few little things (like the, er,
>> "distracting" running pussycat t
Am 26.09.2012 16:26, schrieb Cephas Atheos:
Kostas and Doug, I agree that even a few little things (like the, er,
"distracting" running pussycat thing) can make a huge difference.
It's a Cheetah and the official FPC mascot. So don't say anything wrong
about it ;P
Regards,
Sven
_
G'day Mark!
On 27/09/12 12:40 AM, "Mark Morgan Lloyd"
wrote:
>Out of curiosity, was this before or after "real HP" got spun off as
>Agilent, and what part of the company were you in? (I'm just interested
>to know if your background is computers, chromatography, or electron
>tubes, if you get my
Am 26.09.2012 16:42, schrieb Vincent Snijders:
2012/9/26 Cephas Atheos :
What
would _you_ want to be able to do in one click (or less)?
Go to http://svn.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/
This (although I'm mostly using URL completion for it...) and the following:
* http://wiki.freepascal.or
Cephas Atheos wrote:
A time-and-motion guy a few years ago (when I worked in HP) told us that
for every extra click our customers had to do to get what they wanted on a
website, we lost half of those customers. Four clicks is three clicks too
many!
Out of curiosity, was this before or after "r
On 27/09/12 12:26 AM, "Cephas Atheos" wrote:
>I think that Greg must have had an horrific experience with a forum at
>some time, I hope it hasn't scarred you for life, mate! ;)
Aaaargh I meant "Graeme", not "Greg", my apologies, Graeme.
Sheesh. I can't even get a name right
-Pete
__
On 26/09/12 10:58 PM, "Sven Barth" wrote:
>Regarding mailing lists: If I know that certain content was sent since
>I'm registered I'll use my mailing client's search otherwise I do a
>"searchterm site:freepascal.org" in Google. ;)
Ah, yes, see that's exactly what I'm hoping to stop ever happenin
On 2012-09-26 14:33, Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
Why not do the best of both worlds.
In whose opinion?
I thought it would have been obvious.
I'm not ready yet to declare FPC/Lazarus as an oldtimers only fad.
I'm afraid I don't understand y
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
> > I asked Lazarus devels about that a fat year ago. (at the lazarus day),
> > and IIRC Marc wanted to update the forum software (version) first.
>
> Why not do the best of both worlds.
In whose opinion?
> Setup a NNTP server, then use fpWeb (or
On 2012-09-26 14:10, Marco van de Voort wrote:
I asked Lazarus devels about that a fat year ago. (at the lazarus day),
and IIRC Marc wanted to update the forum software (version) first.
Why not do the best of both worlds. Setup a NNTP server, then use fpWeb
(or even plain CGI will do) to crea
In our previous episode, Sven Barth said:
> > If possible the FreePascal forums should be merged with the Lazarus
> > forums (but **NOT** in the current dreadful Lazarus site!) since,
> > honestly, a lot of people look for FreePascal via Lazarus. While
> > they're technically different projects, fr
Am 26.09.2012 14:36, schrieb Kostas Michalopoulos:
Then is community - FreePascal's current forums are awful and because
of that, dead. I'd suggest to archive them and install a modern board
that follows all the conventions that people have learned from the
hundreds of thousands of other forums o
In our previous episode, Sven Barth said:
> > I don't know what XE3 improves in that regard. But since FPC encountered
> > this problem only after going multiarchitecture, I don't expect Embarcadero
> > to deal with that until the new Delphi compiler lands.
>
> The question is whether Embarcadero
Am 26.09.2012 12:37, schrieb michael.vancann...@wisa.be:
My suggestions (if we do indeed enable it):
intfconst for constref/const
intfdecl for stdcall/cdecl {I would not use extdecl so that there
are no
potential conflicts}
libcall was already mentioned. It also helps in a lot of other
places,
Am 26.09.2012 13:43, schrieb Marco van de Voort:
After all, it seems Delphi doesn't have a constref correct?
I don't know what XE3 improves in that regard. But since FPC encountered
this problem only after going multiarchitecture, I don't expect Embarcadero
to deal with that until the new Delph
Am 26.09.2012 13:27, schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
On 2012-09-26 11:40, Marco van de Voort wrote:
It means the interface will always be constref, and thus no ifdefing
in FPC
(if you don't support <2.6.0) will be necessary.
For fpGUI, I only support the latest stable release of FPC, so that
would
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
> >
> > It means the interface will always be constref, and thus no ifdefing in FPC
> > (if you don't support <2.6.0) will be necessary.
>
> For fpGUI, I only support the latest stable release of FPC, so that
> would be 2.6.0. So I should be fine w
On 2012-09-26 11:40, Marco van de Voort wrote:
It means the interface will always be constref, and thus no ifdefing in FPC
(if you don't support <2.6.0) will be necessary.
For fpGUI, I only support the latest stable release of FPC, so that
would be 2.6.0. So I should be fine with removing tha
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
> > You are right! I forgot about that. 2.6.0 already supports constref so
> > we can indeed remove the FPC_HAS_CONSTREF part from trunk.
>
> Awesome! So I guess that could be back ported to 2.6.x (fixes branch)
> too - ready for the possible 2.6.
On Wed, 26 Sep 2012, Sven Barth wrote:
Am 26.09.2012 12:28, schrieb Marco van de Voort:
In our previous episode, Sven Barth said:
end;
IInterface = IUnknown;
This depends on whether we want to enable $macro in the system unit...
It doesn't work at all since macro's don'
On 2012-09-26 11:28, Sven Barth wrote:
You are right! I forgot about that. 2.6.0 already supports constref so
we can indeed remove the FPC_HAS_CONSTREF part from trunk.
Awesome! So I guess that could be back ported to 2.6.x (fixes branch)
too - ready for the possible 2.6.2 release some day?
On 2012-09-26 11:23, michael.vancann...@wisa.be wrote:
Since years I am a proponent of a libcall calling convention which
translates to the common library calling convention for the platform.
I like that idea.
Regards,
- Graeme -
___
fpc-devel m
Am 26.09.2012 12:28, schrieb Marco van de Voort:
In our previous episode, Sven Barth said:
end;
IInterface = IUnknown;
This depends on whether we want to enable $macro in the system unit...
It doesn't work at all since macro's don't export over unit borders.
Nowhere did
In our previous episode, Sven Barth said:
> > end;
> > IInterface = IUnknown;
>
> This depends on whether we want to enable $macro in the system unit...
It doesn't work at all since macro's don't export over unit borders.
> My suggestions (if we do indeed enable it):
> intfconst
Am 26.09.2012 12:23, schrieb michael.vancann...@wisa.be:
The FPC_HAS_CONSTREF should disappear as soon as the RTL must not be
compilable with a previous version that does not have CONSTREF.
(which in fact could be 2.6.0, but someone would have to confirm that)
You are right! I forgot about that
Am 26.09.2012 12:16, schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
On 2012-09-25 22:16, Henry Vermaak wrote:> I've used a macro for this in
the past. E.g. :
>
> {$macro on}
> {$ifdef windows}
>{$define CCONV:=stdcall}
> {$else}
>{$define CCONV:=cdecl}
> {$endif}
>
> Then use CCONV where you would
On Wed, 26 Sep 2012, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 2012-09-25 22:16, Henry Vermaak wrote:> I've used a macro for this in the
past. E.g. :
{$macro on}
{$ifdef windows}
{$define CCONV:=stdcall}
{$else}
{$define CCONV:=cdecl}
{$endif}
Then use CCONV where you would specify the calling con
On 2012-09-25 22:16, Henry Vermaak wrote:> I've used a macro for this in
the past. E.g. :
>
> {$macro on}
> {$ifdef windows}
>{$define CCONV:=stdcall}
> {$else}
>{$define CCONV:=cdecl}
> {$endif}
>
> Then use CCONV where you would specify the calling convention.
Couldn't something like
On 2012-09-25 20:14, Jeff Duntemann wrote:
I don't know how it is elsewhere, but here in the US, more and more ISPs
are eliminating Usenet access completely. Do you mean an NNTP server for
Yes, Usenet is not the only NNTP servers & newsgroups on the internet.
For example, I host a couple of ne
On 09/25/2012 09:14 PM, Jeff Duntemann wrote:
I don't know how it is elsewhere, but here in the US, more and more
ISPs are eliminating Usenet access completely.
Same in Germany.
Deutsche Telekom silently did that about a year ago.
AFAIK, there is a number of rather cheap payed services for tha
38 matches
Mail list logo
