Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-22 Thread Michael Schnell
Are you sure this would make things easier? Code in the handler needs to be thread safe. Starting a thread is very easy, with TThread? If you use common resources of course you do need to take create to do it in a thread save way. But if you want to off-load some kind of work to one or more

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-22 Thread Micha Nelissen
Michael Schnell wrote: programmed like that using a thread it defines) but uses a thread the program that sets the handler property defines ? Here the programmer does not need to write code that passes the parameters to the thread: the RTL does all this dirty stuff, helping less advanced progra

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-22 Thread Michael Schnell
Hello, fpc-developer list. As "Events" (i.e callbacks at the time being) are syntactically done as properties, could it be possible that property attributes on the long run could help implementing "thread Events" (i.e. a class "fires" an event not as a callback (usually using a the main thread

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-21 Thread Marc Weustink
Florian Klaempfl wrote: Mattias Gaertner schrieb: On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 08:36:24 +0200 (CEST) Daniël Mantione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Op Sun, 21 Oct 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt: .ppu file format is something so general and commonly used by (Free) Pascal programmers that it should bec

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-21 Thread Paul Ishenin
Mattias Gaertner wrote: On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 21:55:45 +0800 Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Florian Klaempfl wrote: Only that the codetools can not use a ppureader.ppu from the RTL or FCL. It can use the ppureader.pas, but not the .ppu. Or use the XML approach as Florian

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-21 Thread Mattias Gaertner
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 21:55:45 +0800 Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Florian Klaempfl wrote: > >> Only that the codetools can not use a ppureader.ppu from the RTL or > >> FCL. It can use the ppureader.pas, but not the .ppu. > >> Or use the XML approach as Florian > >> > > > > I sugges

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-21 Thread Paul Ishenin
Florian Klaempfl wrote: Only that the codetools can not use a ppureader.ppu from the RTL or FCL. It can use the ppureader.pas, but not the .ppu. Or use the XML approach as Florian I suggested :) Paul didn't like it that much He started also a wiki page: http://wiki.freepascal.org/Property

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-21 Thread Daniël Mantione
One way to read .ppu files from multiple compiler versions would be a "ppu meta file", which describes the fields written for each sym and def. The will be one meta file per ppu version. An IDE or tool that wants to read a ppu then processes the meta file for the ppu version to know how to find

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-21 Thread Florian Klaempfl
Mattias Gaertner schrieb: > On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 14:22:30 +0200 (CEST) > Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> [...] Well, the ppu file is divided in blocks; Each block has a type and a size. If you don't "know" a block, you can 'skip' it. (If memory serves me right, of

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-21 Thread Mattias Gaertner
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 14:22:30 +0200 (CEST) Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >[...] > > > Well, the ppu file is divided in blocks; Each block has a type > > > and a size. If you don't "know" a block, you can 'skip' it. > > > (If memory serves me right, of course) > > > > If the codeto

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-21 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007, Florian Klaempfl wrote: > >> > >> If the arrayoptions for example becomes a large set (>32 elements), an > >> old version that will try to read a new version will read too little > >> data. We will of course bump the ppu version, so the compile refuses > >> old ppus. > >

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-21 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 01:43:51 +0200 (CEST) > Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > On Sun, 21 Oct 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 00:46:19 +0200 (CEST) > > > Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-21 Thread Daniël Mantione
Op Sun, 21 Oct 2007, schreef Mattias Gaertner: > On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 08:36:24 +0200 (CEST) > > Is the newer ppureader be able to read older ppu? > In other words: Does a current ppureader contains the code to read the > old format too? No, the read code is similar to the write code, no version

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-21 Thread Florian Klaempfl
Mattias Gaertner schrieb: > On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 08:36:24 +0200 (CEST) > Daniël Mantione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> Op Sun, 21 Oct 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt: >> > .ppu file format is something so general and > commonly used by (Free) Pascal programmers that > it should

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-21 Thread Mattias Gaertner
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 08:36:24 +0200 (CEST) Daniël Mantione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Op Sun, 21 Oct 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt: > > > > > .ppu file format is something so general and > > > > commonly used by (Free) Pascal programmers that > > > > it should become part of our RTL.

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-21 Thread Mattias Gaertner
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 01:43:51 +0200 (CEST) Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, 21 Oct 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > > On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 00:46:19 +0200 (CEST) > > Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Mattias Ga

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-20 Thread Daniël Mantione
Op Sun, 21 Oct 2007, schreef Mattias Gaertner: > Coming back to the real problem: > Searching and reading the ppu is as expensive as reading the sources or > reading the fpdoc xml files. So, there is no need to put the property > information into the ppu - except for closed sources. ppu's are

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-20 Thread Daniël Mantione
Op Sun, 21 Oct 2007, schreef Michael Van Canneyt: > > > .ppu file format is something so general and > > > commonly used by (Free) Pascal programmers that > > > it should become part of our RTL. > > > > And another: > > A lazarus built with fpc 2.0.4 should be able to read the ppu of 2.3.x. >

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-20 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 00:46:19 +0200 (CEST) > Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:29:40 +0200 > > > "Tomas Hajny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-20 Thread Mattias Gaertner
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 00:46:19 +0200 (CEST) Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > > On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:29:40 +0200 > > "Tomas Hajny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On 19 Oct 07, at 13:14, Micha Nelissen wrote: > > > > Jona

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-20 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:29:40 +0200 > "Tomas Hajny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 19 Oct 07, at 13:14, Micha Nelissen wrote: > > > Jonas Maebe wrote: > > > > This is not true. You can perfectly compile a compiler using the > > > > previous' r

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-20 Thread Mattias Gaertner
On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 23:55:31 +0200 (CEST) Daniël Mantione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Op Sat, 20 Oct 2007, schreef Mattias Gaertner: > > > And another: > > A lazarus built with fpc 2.0.4 should be able to read the ppu of > > 2.3.x. Even though the ppu format is very stable, it is not carve

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-20 Thread Daniël Mantione
Op Sat, 20 Oct 2007, schreef Mattias Gaertner: > And another: > A lazarus built with fpc 2.0.4 should be able to read the ppu of 2.3.x. > Even though the ppu format is very stable, it is not carved in stone. > So, maybe it would be best to keep a working copy of the ppu reader > unit in the laza

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-20 Thread Mattias Gaertner
On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:29:40 +0200 "Tomas Hajny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 19 Oct 07, at 13:14, Micha Nelissen wrote: > > Jonas Maebe wrote: > > > This is not true. You can perfectly compile a compiler using the > > > previous' release rtl. > > > > Sure this is not the question. > > > >

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-20 Thread Tomas Hajny
On 19 Oct 07, at 13:14, Micha Nelissen wrote: > Jonas Maebe wrote: > > This is not true. You can perfectly compile a compiler using the > > previous' release rtl. > > Sure this is not the question. > > > E.g. the people developing using the fp IDE often > > do this (because they have a project

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Jonas Maebe
On 19 Oct 2007, at 13:14, Micha Nelissen wrote: Jonas Maebe wrote: This is not true. You can perfectly compile a compiler using the previous' release rtl. Sure this is not the question. It is the question because this is actually done by several people. E.g. the people developing using t

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Micha Nelissen
Jonas Maebe wrote: This is not true. You can perfectly compile a compiler using the previous' release rtl. Sure this is not the question. E.g. the people developing using the fp IDE often do this (because they have a project for the compiler, but that one does not automatically compile the

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Inoussa OUEDRAOGO
> Is there anything to be compatible with? Yes, that is syntax used by Delphi.Net >Does Delphi/win32 use this in any way? No, but if someday Delphi/win32 has to support attributes it will certainly use the same syntax and FPC will be ready. -- Inoussa O. ___

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Jonas Maebe
On 19 Oct 2007, at 11:21, Micha Nelissen wrote: Jonas Maebe wrote: On 19 Oct 2007, at 11:00, Micha Nelissen wrote: Elaborate please ? You mean debugging of the compiler, but don't you always work on new compilers ? When debugging, you could copy the ppu to the "old" RTL if you're using an

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Micha Nelissen
Jonas Maebe wrote: On 19 Oct 2007, at 11:00, Micha Nelissen wrote: Elaborate please ? You mean debugging of the compiler, but don't you always work on new compilers ? When debugging, you could copy the ppu to the "old" RTL if you're using an old RTL with a new compiler ? My global install of

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Jonas Maebe
On 19 Oct 2007, at 11:00, Micha Nelissen wrote: Jonas Maebe wrote: It's not a good idea to make the compiler dependent on features not available in the RTL of the previous release, as this can complicate debugging quite a bit. Elaborate please ? You mean debugging of the compiler, but don

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Micha Nelissen
Jonas Maebe wrote: It's not a good idea to make the compiler dependent on features not available in the RTL of the previous release, as this can complicate debugging quite a bit. Elaborate please ? You mean debugging of the compiler, but don't you always work on new compilers ? When debugging

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Jonas Maebe wrote: > > On 19 Oct 2007, at 10:28, Micha Nelissen wrote: > > >Michael Van Canneyt wrote: > > >Well, the unit is in the compiler directory, and is not meant for > > >distribution. > > >It can only be in the compiler directory, otherwise it's impossible to > >

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Jonas Maebe
On 19 Oct 2007, at 10:28, Micha Nelissen wrote: Michael Van Canneyt wrote: Well, the unit is in the compiler directory, and is not meant for distribution. It can only be in the compiler directory, otherwise it's impossible to bootstrap the compiler (i.e. compile the compiler the first tim

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Micha Nelissen
Michael Van Canneyt wrote: Well, the unit is in the compiler directory, and is not meant for distribution. It can only be in the compiler directory, otherwise it's impossible to bootstrap the compiler (i.e. compile the compiler the first time). The RTL is always compiled before the compiler is

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Marco van de Voort
> > But IMHO, if a new langage feature have to be introduced, > > a feature already implemented in Delphi, it will be good > > to make it compatible. Mainly for code sharing. > > > There already is a Delphi compatibility compiler switch. There could be > a Delphi.NET (and maybe a Chrome) comp

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Michael Schnell
But IMHO, if a new langage feature have to be introduced, a feature already implemented in Delphi, it will be good to make it compatible. Mainly for code sharing. There already is a Delphi compatibility compiler switch. There could be a Delphi.NET (and maybe a Chrome) compatibility compile

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Paul Ishenin wrote: > Michael Van Canneyt wrote: > > > > > Ok, no problem - lets it be ppu. We only need some way of accessing that > > > data. > > > Is ppu reading methods already exists in RTL or another fpc package? > > > > > > > The ppu unit does what you need. I

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Paul Ishenin
Marco van de Voort wrote: function func:integer; cdecl; Most of the time yes, sometime no like the following : procedure proc( CONST AParametter : integer ); IMHO this time, Delphi compatibility is a very strong point. Is there anything to be compatible with? Does Delphi/win32 us

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-19 Thread Marco van de Voort
> > function func:integer; cdecl; > Most of the time yes, sometime no like the following : > > procedure proc( CONST AParametter : integer ); > > IMHO this time, Delphi compatibility is a very strong point. Is there anything to be compatible with? Does Delphi/win32 use this in any way? _

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Flávio Etrusco
On 10/18/07, Inoussa OUEDRAOGO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > It is a strong point. > > > > On the other hard keeping the language clean is an important responsible > > task we have. We never planned to be compatible with Delphi.NET. (I have > > never considered Delphi.NET a real Pascal implement

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Inoussa OUEDRAOGO
> It is a strong point. > > On the other hard keeping the language clean is an important responsible > task we have. We never planned to be compatible with Delphi.NET. (I have > never considered Delphi.NET a real Pascal implementation; it departs > rather far from what Wirth designed). While .NET f

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Paul Ishenin
Michael Van Canneyt wrote: Ok, no problem - lets it be ppu. We only need some way of accessing that data. Is ppu reading methods already exists in RTL or another fpc package? The ppu unit does what you need. It is used by the compiler and dumppu program provided by FPC. Maybe we should

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Joao Morais
Marco van de Voort wrote: These idiots had to do it totally against the Pascal Language specs. This is not Pascal language anymore. This is Delphi language. Delphi or Delphi.NET? Does native Delphi do more with it than ignore it? Delphi.net in this case. (like the dotted unit names introdu

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Daniël Mantione
Op Thu, 18 Oct 2007, schreef Inoussa OUEDRAOGO: > > function func:integer; cdecl; > Most of the time yes, sometime no like the following : > > procedure proc( CONST AParametter : integer ); > > IMHO this time, Delphi compatibility is a very strong point. It is a strong point. On the other ha

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Inoussa OUEDRAOGO
> function func:integer; cdecl; Most of the time yes, sometime no like the following : procedure proc( CONST AParametter : integer ); IMHO this time, Delphi compatibility is a very strong point. -- Inoussa O. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Marco van de Voort
> > property TransactionModel: TTransactionModel read FtransactionModel > > write SetTransactionModel attribute Engines: List = > > 'firebird,oracle,sybase-asa'; > > > > much more logical ? > > As attributes is meant to be used with allmost any construct( class, > field, property, method > o

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Marco van de Voort
> Michael Van Canneyt wrote: > > > > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Inoussa OUEDRAOGO wrote: > > > >>> how is [...] coupled to TransactionModel ? > >>> Just because it happens to be declared the line in front of it ? > >> Yes, the attribute declaration is placed imediately prior to the > >> element it app

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Inoussa OUEDRAOGO
> property TransactionModel: TTransactionModel read FtransactionModel > write SetTransactionModel attribute Engines: List = > 'firebird,oracle,sybase-asa'; > > much more logical ? As attributes is meant to be used with allmost any construct( class, field, property, method orprocedure paramet

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Marc Weustink
Micha Nelissen wrote: Inoussa OUEDRAOGO wrote: so the sample code becomes ( using Delphi's attribute syntax ) TxxxDatabase = class(...) ... [Engines(List='firebird,oracle,sybase-asa')] property TransactionModel: TTransactionModel read FtransactionModel

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Micha Nelissen wrote: > Inoussa OUEDRAOGO wrote: > > so the sample code becomes ( using Delphi's attribute syntax ) > > > > TxxxDatabase = class(...) > > ... > > [Engines(List='firebird,oracle,sybase-asa')] > > property TransactionModel: TTransactionModel read FtransactionM

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Micha Nelissen
Inoussa OUEDRAOGO wrote: > so the sample code becomes ( using Delphi's attribute syntax ) > > TxxxDatabase = class(...) > ... > [Engines(List='firebird,oracle,sybase-asa')] > property TransactionModel: TTransactionModel read FtransactionModel > write Set

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Joao Morais
Michael Van Canneyt wrote: On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Inoussa OUEDRAOGO wrote: how is [...] coupled to TransactionModel ? Just because it happens to be declared the line in front of it ? Yes, the attribute declaration is placed imediately prior to the element it applies to. Example at http://hall

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Inoussa OUEDRAOGO wrote: > > how is [...] coupled to TransactionModel ? > > Just because it happens to be declared the line in front of it ? > > Yes, the attribute declaration is placed imediately prior to the > element it applies to. > Example at > http://hallvards.blogs

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Inoussa OUEDRAOGO
Another usage sample at http://dn.codegear.com/article/36962 In the document, the "[ServiceContract]" is used by the .Net runtime to define service interface( see bellow ). type [ServiceContract] ISimpleCalc = interface [OperationContract] function Add(a, b: integer): integer; [

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Inoussa OUEDRAOGO
> how is [...] coupled to TransactionModel ? > Just because it happens to be declared the line in front of it ? Yes, the attribute declaration is placed imediately prior to the element it applies to. Example at http://hallvards.blogspot.com/2007/09/dn4dp14-net-only-attributes-support.html -- I

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Marc Weustink
Inoussa OUEDRAOGO wrote: so the sample code becomes ( using Delphi's attribute syntax ) TxxxDatabase = class(...) ... [Engines(List='firebird,oracle,sybase-asa')] property TransactionModel: TTransactionModel read FtransactionModel write SetTransactionM

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Inoussa OUEDRAOGO
so the sample code becomes ( using Delphi's attribute syntax ) TxxxDatabase = class(...) ... [Engines(List='firebird,oracle,sybase-asa')] property TransactionModel: TTransactionModel read FtransactionModel write SetTransactionModel; ... end; -- Inoussa

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
On 10/18/07, Flávio Etrusco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The only downside to is that it'll probably be necessary to keep some > duplicated parser code... Actually code tools should already have all parsing capability necessary -- Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Inoussa OUEDRAOGO
Getting these informations at runtime is definitely a _powerful_ _feature_, it's no more than .Net's attributes or java's annotations. Their generation could be activated by a compiler switch like the RTTI {$M+} and {$M-} so in debug mode it will be activated for the LCL code and deactivated in re

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Marc Weustink
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: Maybe: procedure MethodX; {%widgetsets win32 wince} This should be quicker and easier to implement then extending the ppu files. yeah, and then we compile the source and poof, gone. lazarus doesn't want to parse the sourcefiles forever, eventually we will u

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Flávio Etrusco
(...) > > Maybe: > > procedure MethodX; {%widgetsets win32 wince} > > This should be quicker and easier to implement then extending the ppu > files. > > thanks, > -- > Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho > Amen, brother Felipe ;-) The only downside to is that it'll probably be necessary to keep some dupl

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Paul Ishenin
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: On 10/18/07, Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The bad thing that this will not work. I am developer Felipe, not technical writer. I dont know how to write helps and moreover I will not write them. I actually consider that what you wish to achie

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
On 10/18/07, Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The bad thing that this will not work. I am developer Felipe, not > technical writer. I dont know how to write helps and moreover I will not > write them. I actually consider that what you wish to achieve *is* documentation. You desire to pass

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Paul Ishenin
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: One simple idea I just had is that this could be added to the documentation. The IDE can look at the docs and show whatever is needed for each different property on each class. The downside is that the component would require docs in the same format as the lcl/r

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Paul Ishenin wrote: > Michael Van Canneyt wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Paul Ishenin wrote: > > > > > > > Hello, fpc-developer list. > > > > > > Some time ago I posted here proposal to extend platform keyword. You gave > > > a > > > hostile reception to that proposal. >

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
One simple idea I just had is that this could be added to the documentation. The IDE can look at the docs and show whatever is needed for each different property on each class. The downside is that the component would require docs in the same format as the lcl/rtc/fcl ones, althougth that shouldn't

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Paul Ishenin
Michael Van Canneyt wrote: On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Paul Ishenin wrote: Hello, fpc-developer list. Some time ago I posted here proposal to extend platform keyword. You gave a hostile reception to that proposal. Later Florian in private conversation with me suggested better idea of property att

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Paul Ishenin wrote: > Hello, fpc-developer list. > > Some time ago I posted here proposal to extend platform keyword. You gave a > hostile reception to that proposal. > > Later Florian in private conversation with me suggested better idea of > property attributes. Indeed,

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Vinzent Hoefler
On Thursday 18 October 2007 12:55, Michael Schnell wrote: > > I think it is better to send a RTF document than a ODT document: > > * it is smaller > > * more programs can read it > > * no need to download and install plug-ins for a seizable minority > > of people without open office or ODT-plug-in

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Michael Van Canneyt
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Vincent Snijders wrote: > Michael Schnell schreef: > > > > > I bet you those two are MS Office users [..ducking and hiding..] > > > > > Should be no problem at all. > > AFAIK (I'm not an MS-Office user :-) ), there is a free plugin that enables > > even M$-Office to rea

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Vincent Snijders
Michael Schnell schreef: I think it is better to send a RTF document than a ODT document: * it is smaller * more programs can read it * no need to download and install plug-ins for a seizable minority of people without open office or ODT-plug-in installed. Valid considerations, but regarding t

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Michael Schnell
I think it is better to send a RTF document than a ODT document: * it is smaller * more programs can read it * no need to download and install plug-ins for a seizable minority of people without open office or ODT-plug-in installed. Valid considerations, but regarding this, PDF is a much better

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Vincent Snijders
Michael Schnell schreef: I bet you those two are MS Office users [..ducking and hiding..] Should be no problem at all. AFAIK (I'm not an MS-Office user :-) ), there is a free plugin that enables even M$-Office to read and write standard conform files (i.e. Open Document ODT). I think i

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Michael Schnell
I bet you those two are MS Office users [..ducking and hiding..] Should be no problem at all. AFAIK (I'm not an MS-Office user :-) ), there is a free plugin that enables even M$-Office to read and write standard conform files (i.e. Open Document ODT). -Michael __

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On 18/10/2007, Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Michael Schnell пишет: > > > odt is not well known format > > > > Open Document format is an ISO standard. > > yes, I know, but at least two developers complained about it, so rtf for > those who have no OpenOffice. To those two developers

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Paul Ishenin
Michael Schnell пишет: > odt is not well known format Open Document format is an ISO standard. yes, I know, but at least two developers complained about it, so rtf for those who have no OpenOffice. Best regards, Paul Ishenin. ___ fpc-devel mail

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Michael Schnell
> odt is not well known format Open Document format is an ISO standard. (That is why Microsoft's "Open XML" hopefully will not be accepted as a concurrent "standard" for the same purpose.) -Michael ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepasc

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Paul Ishenin
Marc Weustink пишет: Micha Nelissen wrote: Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: VB) it showed a description of that property. As far as I remember that description was part of the class definition - Delphi never supported something like that. I don't think you want to carry around complete property descr

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Marc Weustink
Micha Nelissen wrote: Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: VB) it showed a description of that property. As far as I remember that description was part of the class definition - Delphi never supported something like that. I don't think you want to carry around complete property descriptions in your final

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Paul Ishenin
Micha Nelissen пишет: Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: VB) it showed a description of that property. As far as I remember that description was part of the class definition - Delphi never supported something like that. I don't think you want to carry around complete property descriptions in your final

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Micha Nelissen
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: VB) it showed a description of that property. As far as I remember that description was part of the class definition - Delphi never supported something like that. I don't think you want to carry around complete property descriptions in your final executables ;-). Mic

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-18 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On 18/10/2007, Paul Ishenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Later Florian in private conversation with me suggested better idea of > property attributes. Indeed, attributes are more general solution than > platform keyword. That's a very interesting idea. I can see many uses for it, especially if

Re: [fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-17 Thread Paul Ishenin
Paul Ishenin wrote: Attached file (open document format can be opened by OpenOffice) contains proposed syntax diagrams and declaration examples. Sorry, seems odt is not well known format but hope rtf is :( In attach same file in rtf. Best regards, Paul Ishenin. property_attributes.rtf Descr

[fpc-devel] property syntax extension

2007-10-17 Thread Paul Ishenin
Hello, fpc-developer list. Some time ago I posted here proposal to extend platform keyword. You gave a hostile reception to that proposal. Later Florian in private conversation with me suggested better idea of property attributes. Indeed, attributes are more general solution than platform ke