/This might be of interest or used for future reference./
Microsoft has made an effort to open up and document it's proprietary
PDB debugging file format, a.k.a program database (.pdb) file, primarily
used by Visual Studio Debugger and WinDbg. Apparently, the aim is to
open it for use in other
On 22/03/2016 17:56, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
or better something concise like ltAuto,ltUser,ltNone.
It may make more sense to call it ListSortType (as opposed to ListType):
TListSortType = (lstNone, lstAuto, lstManual);
Something like this could work (prototype code):
===
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, Jonas Maebe wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, David Jenkins wrote:
or have a ListType property that is ltAutoSort, ltNaturalSort, ltNone
I think this idea is probably the best alternative.
I d
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, Jonas Maebe wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, David Jenkins wrote:
or have a ListType property that is ltAutoSort, ltNaturalSort, ltNone
I think this idea is probably the best alternative.
I don't think "natural sort" is a good name, because it
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, David Jenkins wrote:
or have a ListType property that is ltAutoSort, ltNaturalSort, ltNone
I think this idea is probably the best alternative.
I don't think "natural sort" is a good name, because it has a specific
meaning (https://en.wikiped
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, David Jenkins wrote:
or have a ListType property that is ltAutoSort, ltNaturalSort, ltNone
I think this idea is probably the best alternative.
Michael.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.fr
On 3/22/16 10:48 AM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, David Jenkins wrote:
No one here holds Delphi up on a pedestal - least of all me. My
viewpoint is completely practical/funcitonal - I have to make our
code base work with FPC/LCL and VCL. Given the way we use find
func
On 3/22/16 9:53 AM, Denis Kozlov wrote:
Please consider the following implementation logic, I think it covers
all angles:
procedure Find(const S: string; out Index: Integer):Boolean;
begin
if Sorted then
Result := FindSorted(S, Index);
else
begin
Index := IndexOf(S);
Res
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, David Jenkins wrote:
No one here holds Delphi up on a pedestal - least of all me. My viewpoint is
completely practical/funcitonal - I have to make our code base work with
FPC/LCL and VCL. Given the way we use find functionality (with a mixture of
naturally sorted and a
On 3/22/16 9:43 AM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
Here we disagree.
It IS buggy behavior. Delphi is not sacrosanct, it does contain bugs like
any software. This is one of them.
No one here holds Delphi up on a pedestal - least of all me. My
viewpoint is completely practical/funcitonal - I
On 22 March 2016 at 14:43, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
> On 3/22/16 2:01 AM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There are now several options:
>>> 1. I change the code to raise an exception instead (as was my original
>>> plan)
>>> 2. I change the code to resort to a linear search if sorted is
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, David Jenkins wrote:
On 3/22/16 2:01 AM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
But you agree that if Find is called on an unsorted list, bogus data will
be returned ? Or, worse, an never-ending loop may occur ?
In short, as you say, an "error condition" can ensue without you knowi
Find method must find an item in the list. Whether the list is sorted or
not, whether the binary search optimization can be applied or not - are
implementation details.
Find method should either:
1) Raise exception if list is not sorted,
2) Use IndexOf method if the list is not sorted (preferable)
Dear fellow fpc build-facility and VPN users,
You may have heard that FirmOS (my company) has ceased to be.
Currently I am working at a new startup named www.wolke.club,
and we have to rearrange the vm machine hosting.
I will try to host as many machines as possible, but we have to cleanup
(the
On 3/22/16 4:15 AM, Michalis Kamburelis wrote:
2016-03-22 8:18 GMT+01:00 Ondrej Pokorny :
This would be my preference too --- just raise the exception. Or just
fallback on linear search using IndexOf, if the list is not known to
be sorted.
In my experience, it's a common bug right now to call
On 3/22/16 2:01 AM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
But you agree that if Find is called on an unsorted list, bogus data will
be returned ? Or, worse, an never-ending loop may occur ?
In short, as you say, an "error condition" can ensue without you
knowing it.
That is a bug. So, in my opinion (an
2016-03-22 8:18 GMT+01:00 Ondrej Pokorny :
>
> On 22.03.2016 8:01, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>>
>> 1. I change the code to raise an exception instead (as was my original plan)
>
>
> This is the way to go. False should be returned if nothing was found.
> In case there are problems with starting par
On 22.03.2016 8:01, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
1. I change the code to raise an exception instead (as was my original
plan)
This is the way to go. False should be returned if nothing was found.
In case there are problems with starting parameters (or string list
status or whatever), an exceptio
Am 22.03.2016 03:25 schrieb "Anthony Walter" :
>
> Maciej,
>
> Please let me know when you apply Sven's recommendations to the make
commands and I'll test. Thanks..
>
Small correction: these changes don't aplly to the make commands, but the
RTL so that these make commands work correctly again.
Re
On Mon, 21 Mar 2016, David Jenkins wrote:
I understand the need for the list to be sorted and agree that calling find
on an unsorted list is an error condition.
I am not convinced that current change deals with that well.
For one, the Sorted flag and actual state of the list are not directl
20 matches
Mail list logo