>>> On 2012-11-27 16:19, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
>
> Correct. But the design should also not try to cover all possible use cases
> at any cost.
>
> Till now, I have not seen a common use case that will not work.
See Test1 in a separate message i sent. It will not work with the
current impleme
Given the considerations i did about the observer feature, here are
some simple projects that supports my concerns and therefore the
request i made to change the interface of two functions.
Test1
As is today, if you have a reference to a IFPObserver is not possible
to use it to attach to, e.g., ch
On 28 Nov 2012, at 22:04, Carlo Ko wrote:
> Op 28-11-2012 21:50, Jonas Maebe schreef:
>>
>> On 28 Nov 2012, at 21:36, Martin wrote:
>>
>>> It does not matter if I compile it with stdcall, cdecl, pascal. The below
>>> on a 32 bit intel mac (fpc 2.6.0) always returns result in 2 registers
>>> (
Op 28-11-2012 21:50, Jonas Maebe schreef:
On 28 Nov 2012, at 21:36, Martin wrote:
It does not matter if I compile it with stdcall, cdecl, pascal. The below on a
32 bit intel mac (fpc 2.6.0) always returns result in 2 registers (eax, edx)
Is there a way to change this (some declaration in the
Hello
I have a problem when using ActiveX and HeapTrace -gh.
I've imported a type libary using the Lazarus tool:
C:\Windows\System32\Speech\Common\sapi.dll -> SpeechLib_5_4_TLB.pas
From these imported controls, I'm using TAxcSpVoice with this code
(testing):
On 28 Nov 2012, at 21:36, Martin wrote:
> It does not matter if I compile it with stdcall, cdecl, pascal. The below on
> a 32 bit intel mac (fpc 2.6.0) always returns result in 2 registers (eax, edx)
>
> Is there a way to change this (some declaration in the source, some switch)?
It's a bug th
It does not matter if I compile it with stdcall, cdecl, pascal. The
below on a 32 bit intel mac (fpc 2.6.0) always returns result in 2
registers (eax, edx)
Is there a way to change this (some declaration in the source, some switch)?
function Point(AX, AY: Integer): TPoint;
begin
with Result
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, luiz americo pereira camara wrote:
2012/11/28 Graeme Geldenhuys :
On 2012-11-27 16:19, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
If you haven't made other changes to those LCL Mediators since the code
you emailed me, I could take a look at updating the code for Lazarus too.
That's
On 2012-11-28 15:25, luiz americo pereira camara wrote:
> if an architeture works in a scenario does not mean it's good or at
> least could not be improved.
I'm not disputing that either. It just seems that Michael and I have
been using observers in production code for many years. The FPC design
i
2012/11/28 Graeme Geldenhuys :
> On 2012-11-27 16:19, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>>
> If you haven't made other changes to those LCL Mediators since the code
> you emailed me, I could take a look at updating the code for Lazarus too.
>
> That's a perfect example of the FPC Observers support being
On 2012-11-28 15:02, luiz americo pereira camara wrote:
>
> Given that better discuss / test / change such important change
> earlier than later, nothing stops to treat this release as a beta (or
> whatever name is appropriate) even if was formally released as a RC.
[Not related to the issue in
On 28 Nov 2012, at 16:02, luiz americo pereira camara wrote:
2012/11/28 Jonas Maebe :
Personally, I think a release candidate is too late. A release
candidate
freezes all interfaces (even a beta release does so already,
normally).
Generally the only fixes still performed afterwards are f
Hi,
I tested the attached program under Delphi 7 and FPC 2.6.0 and FPC 2.7.1
(dated 2012-11-15).
The test application tests two things:
1) Interface delegation via another class
2) Overriding a interface implementation using method resolution
Under Delphi 7 the test application compiles and
2012/11/28 Jonas Maebe :
>
>
> Personally, I think a release candidate is too late. A release candidate
> freezes all interfaces (even a beta release does so already, normally).
> Generally the only fixes still performed afterwards are for blocking
> crashers/failures, major security holes or build
2012/11/28 Graeme Geldenhuys :
> Luiz, could you produce a small sample application (or show the code you
> are working on for Lazarus) where you think the current FPC Observer
> implementation doesn't work. Your initial bug report doesn't include any
> test project to show the issue.
Yes. I'll
2012/11/28 :
>
>
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, luiz americo pereira camara wrote:
>
>> 2012/11/27 Michael Van Canneyt :
>> As practical example take a LCL Form that is supposed to be observed.
>> It takes an Observer property and attach it to certain child controls
>> (TEdit etc)
>>
>> 1) Currently i'm
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, michael.vancann...@wisa.be said:
At some point, there must be an object, and at some point, there is a
typecast,
You often can't reroot external components, but if they support tcomponent
What does "reroot external co
On 28 Nov 2012, at 12:05, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
What is the intent of
-Adefault Use default assembler
-Aas Assemble using GNU AS
on classic unix systems e.g. SPARC and MIPS? Is it that -Aas selects
gas (and assumes that gas's command-line is consistent for cross-
build
On 2012-11-27 16:19, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
> The consequence is that you must pass around the objects themselves.
I'm curious to see Luiz's code example of what issues he has, but in the
mean time, maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea to update (with latest
FPC changes and Observer suppor
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Vincent Snijders
wrote:
> 2012/11/28
>> It IS a big change. There is production code out there that uses this,
>> and this is an incompatible change.
>
> Then Luiz is right on time with his proposal, with the frist release
> candidate of the first release that con
What is the intent of
-Adefault Use default assembler
-Aas Assemble using GNU AS
on classic unix systems e.g. SPARC and MIPS? Is it that -Aas selects
gas (and assumes that gas's command-line is consistent for cross-builds
etc.) and that -Adefault selects whatever variant of
In our previous episode, michael.vancann...@wisa.be said:
> >> At some point, there must be an object, and at some point, there is a
> >> typecast,
> >
> > You often can't reroot external components, but if they support tcomponent
>
> What does "reroot external components" mean ?
(Change the root
On 28 Nov 2012, at 09:23, Vincent Snijders wrote:
2012/11/28
It IS a big change. There is production code out there that uses
this,
and this is an incompatible change.
Then Luiz is right on time with his proposal, with the frist release
candidate of the first release that contains this fe
On 28 Nov 2012, at 08:47, Alexander Klenin wrote:
Will global variables and static global arrays be always initialized
to zero?
Yes.
Jonas
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc
On 2012-11-28 10:07, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
>
> You can add a CORBA interface to any existing class, and it doesn't need
> to descend from TInterfacedObject either. CORBA is not COM interfaces.
>
In case anybody is in doubt. Here is a small example where CORBA
interfaces are attached to TCompo
On 2012-11-28 09:41, Marco van de Voort wrote:
>
> You often can't reroot external components, but if they support tcomponent
> (and thus Tinterfacedobject), you can add an interface in a child class.
You can add a CORBA interface to any existing class, and it doesn't need
to descend from TInter
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, michael.vancann...@wisa.be said:
Then Luiz is right on time with his proposal, with the frist release
candidate of the first release that contains this feature. If
production code already uses it, then the production code
On 2012-11-28 08:23, Vincent Snijders wrote:
> production code already uses it, then the production code writers must
> have taken a risk for change knowing that this was a not yet released
> feature.
+1
I thought it was a known fact that if you use FPC Trunk in production
code, you stand a very
In our previous episode, michael.vancann...@wisa.be said:
> > Then Luiz is right on time with his proposal, with the frist release
> > candidate of the first release that contains this feature. If
> > production code already uses it, then the production code writers must
> > have taken a risk for c
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Vincent Snijders wrote:
2012/11/28
It IS a big change. There is production code out there that uses this,
and this is an incompatible change.
Then Luiz is right on time with his proposal, with the frist release
candidate of the first release that contains this feature.
28.11.2012 16:23, Vincent Snijders wrote:
2012/11/28
It IS a big change. There is production code out there that uses this,
and this is an incompatible change.
Then Luiz is right on time with his proposal, with the frist release
candidate of the first release that contains this feature. If
pr
2012/11/28
> It IS a big change. There is production code out there that uses this,
> and this is an incompatible change.
Then Luiz is right on time with his proposal, with the frist release
candidate of the first release that contains this feature. If
production code already uses it, then the pr
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, luiz americo pereira camara wrote:
2012/11/27 Michael Van Canneyt :
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, luiz americo pereira camara wrote:
Hi, i requested a change to observer interface with some
considerations in http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=23394
It will not happen.
33 matches
Mail list logo
