On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote:
On the other side, i still think that should be kept out of TCustomApplication.
Well, I have already explained why I want it exactly there :)
While the simple requirement of checking another
instance is easy to implement into TCustomA
2015-09-29 16:12 GMT-03:00 Michael Van Canneyt :
>
>
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote:
>
> Unit uniqueinstanceraw
>>
>
>
>> Please look carefully
>>
>
> My sincere apologies,
>
>
No problem.
To be clear, i don't plead to uniqueinstance be used by fpc or Lazarus at
all.
Th
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote:
Unit uniqueinstanceraw
Please look carefully
My sincere apologies,
I was too fast and indeed opened the wrong unit. uniqueinstance, and
uniqueinstancebase, not uniqueinstanceraw :(
So, it could be used as well, if we can sort out
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
On 29.09.2015 16:09, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
Both are OK. Use of one does not exclude use of the other.
I was going to add it in CustApp anyway as soon as I had looked at your
implementation.
I started working on the CustApp variant. It's even
Unit uniqueinstanceraw
Please look carefully
Luiz
Em 29/09/2015 12:01, "Michael Van Canneyt"
escreveu:
>
>
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote:
>
> 2015-09-29 11:50 GMT-03:00 Luiz Americo Pereira Camara <
>> luizameri...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> It can be used without the
On 29.09.2015 16:09, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
Both are OK. Use of one does not exclude use of the other.
I was going to add it in CustApp anyway as soon as I had looked at
your implementation.
I started working on the CustApp variant. It's even simpler than the LCL
component because you ca
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote:
2015-09-29 11:50 GMT-03:00 Luiz Americo Pereira Camara <
luizameri...@gmail.com>:
It can be used without the component. The component is just a convenience.
See the examples
https://github.com/blikblum/luipack/blob/master/uniquein
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote:
2. Then it is only available in visually designed applications.
Services, website servers and custom console apps are non-visual.
I am specificially thinking FastCGI processes.
See above
I didn't say it could not be done with
2015-09-29 11:50 GMT-03:00 Luiz Americo Pereira Camara <
luizameri...@gmail.com>:
>
>
> It can be used without the component. The component is just a convenience.
> See the examples
>
https://github.com/blikblum/luipack/blob/master/uniqueinstance/testraw/project1.lpr
Luiz
__
2015-09-29 10:35 GMT-03:00 Michael Van Canneyt :
>
>
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Juha Manninen wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I am not proposing to make a new class.
>>> I want a property "SingeInstance" in CustApp which activates this
>>> automaticall
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
On 29.09.2015 15:35, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
1. Using a LCL component means that you must instantiate a form/datamodule
first.
By that time, a database connection may already have been made (just
to name something), which is exactly what
On 29.09.2015 15:35, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
1. Using a LCL component means that you must instantiate a
form/datamodule first.
By that time, a database connection may already have been made (just
to name something), which is exactly what you want to avoid.
The check for single ins
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
> For simpleIPC, yes. But the new implementation has no dependencies except
> sysutils, classes. So the argument becomes void.
It adds extra code to every application. Maybe not too much though.
> ...
> That is why I think TCustomApplic
On 29.09.2015 15:01, Juha Manninen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
Juha, I changed the advancedipc.pas unit (this one from the mailing list is
newer than from the bug report). I can prepare a new patch for the bug
report.
No need for a new patch if it did not chan
On 29.09.2015 15:42, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
On 29.09.2015 12:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I added it to fpc/packages/fcl-base. It compiles OK, there are no
dangerous dependencies except sysutils and classes.
Michael, you added the wrong (old) unit from the bug report, not the
latest simpleipc-
On 29.09.2015 12:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I added it to fpc/packages/fcl-base. It compiles OK, there are no
dangerous dependencies except sysutils and classes.
Michael, you added the wrong (old) unit from the bug report, not the
latest simpleipc-compatible one from the mailing list. Please
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
On 29.09.2015 12:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I added it to fpc/packages/fcl-base. It compiles OK, there are no dangerous
dependencies except sysutils and classes.
Michael, you added the wrong (old) unit from the bug report, not the latest
simplei
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Juha Manninen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
I am not proposing to make a new class.
I want a property "SingeInstance" in CustApp which activates this
automatically.
I had the very same idea when this was discussed a long time ago in
Martin Schreiber wrote on Tue, 29 Sep 2015:
With the changes finally MSEi18n can support Unicode resourcestrings for FPC
3.1.1, see
http://mseide-msegui.sourceforge.net/pics/msei18n_fpc_3_0.png
Thank you very much.
Thanks for testing.
Jonas
___
fp
On 29.09.2015 12:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I added it to fpc/packages/fcl-base. It compiles OK, there are no
dangerous dependencies except sysutils and classes.
Michael, you added the wrong (old) unit from the bug report, not the
latest simpleipc-compatible one from the mailing list. Please
On Tuesday 29 September 2015 00:30:48 Jonas Maebe wrote:
> However, I would already like to ask everyone that uses resource strings
> to check FPC trunk r31881 or later with their program to ensure it still
> works correctly, and also try the changed rstconv utility. See
> http://bugs.freepascal.o
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
> Juha, I changed the advancedipc.pas unit (this one from the mailing list is
> newer than from the bug report). I can prepare a new patch for the bug
> report.
No need for a new patch if it did not change otherwise. I only would
like to move
On 29.09.2015 14:42, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
OK, I see your point. Yes, I think it is possible and even not that
much work to do.
I programmed "multiple instances" handling into Lazarus IDE. It's the
same like e.g. Adobe Photoshop or VLC player wo
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
> I am not proposing to make a new class.
> I want a property "SingeInstance" in CustApp which activates this
> automatically.
I had the very same idea when this was discussed a long time ago in
Lazarus list.
Martin Friebe noted that eve
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
On 29.09.2015 13:50, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
You may not think this is important, but for beginners, this can be a
tremendous aid.
The easier we make it, the better. Lazarus is a RAD environment, after all.
Michael.
OK, I see your point. Yes
On 29.09.2015 13:50, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
You may not think this is important, but for beginners, this can be a
tremendous aid.
The easier we make it, the better. Lazarus is a RAD environment, after
all.
Michael.
OK, I see your point. Yes, I think it is possible and even not that muc
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
On 29.09.2015 12:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I added it to fpc/packages/fcl-base. It compiles OK, there are no dangerous
dependencies except sysutils and classes.
Thanks!
Juha, if you want to implement the single IDE instance, then I would l
On 29.09.2015 12:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I added it to fpc/packages/fcl-base. It compiles OK, there are no
dangerous dependencies except sysutils and classes.
Thanks!
Juha, if you want to implement the single IDE instance, then I would
like to ask you to implement this in custapp.pp
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Tomas Hajny wrote:
On Tue, September 29, 2015 12:30, Juha Manninen wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt & Tomas Hajny & everybody who wants to test:
I prepared a fully compatible AdvancedIPC unit. See the attachment.
...
M
On Tue, September 29, 2015 12:30, Juha Manninen wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
>> Michael Van Canneyt & Tomas Hajny & everybody who wants to test:
>>
>> I prepared a fully compatible AdvancedIPC unit. See the attachment.
>> ...
>
> Michael and Tomas, I am planning
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
> Michael Van Canneyt & Tomas Hajny & everybody who wants to test:
>
> I prepared a fully compatible AdvancedIPC unit. See the attachment.
> ...
Michael and Tomas, I am planning to copy AdvancedIPC temporarily to
Lazarus sources.
If you are p
31 matches
Mail list logo
