L505 wrote:
>
>> MSEgui has a distinct advantage over Lazarus. It compiles under Delphi. Just
>> tried it. Fiddled with one or two lines in the code, but I got the IDE to
>> compile and run and then built a small hello world app that also ran. Pretty
>> impressive really.
>
> And the exe's/elf's
On Tuesday 18 April 2006 17:24, L505 wrote:
> sense to me.). Or maybe you mean a foundation, like a non-profit
> organization? Obviously FPC is not out for profit, but out to help
> the developer. So I can see a non-profit organization working - but
> this would mean that FPC team would spend more
> MSEgui has a distinct advantage over Lazarus. It compiles under Delphi. Just
> tried it. Fiddled with one or two lines in the code, but I got the IDE to
> compile and run and then built a small hello world app that also ran. Pretty
> impressive really.
And the exe's/elf's it generates are reas
MSEgui has a distinct advantage over Lazarus. It compiles under Delphi. Just
tried it. Fiddled with one or two lines in the code, but I got the IDE to
compile and run and then built a small hello world app that also ran. Pretty
impressive really.
M
> Hi,
>
> Movie:
> =
> For those who did no
PS. I hoped that this thread will die and I will not waste my time, but
it is alive and I can't hold myself and do write an answer.
To be on topic, I just want to share my thoughts (they do probably differ
from yours), ended with not choosing Lazarus (but I trace its
development a little). I am n
> > Disadvantages of Delphi:
> > 2. It's closed source, if it's buggy you're lost.
>
> Main problems comes from RTL and VCL, not a compiler - it is
> stable, at least for D7. As D7 Pro+ comes with RTL and VCL sources, it is
> easy to fix and recompile both. And there is many excelent free and
> Op
Hi,
Movie:
=
For those who did not try MSEide yet, here is a movie teaser.
http://users.pandora.be/Jan.Van.hijfte/qtforfpc/mse01.html
Wiki:
===
http://www.freepascal.org/wiki/index.php/MSEide_&_MSEgui
Can someone provide a more appropriate entry in the wiki
for this page. I cannot modify al
> If you really want to make Free Pascal / Lazarus better you should go
> with specific topics, and discuss what would be a solution to improve
> each small parts where you consider Delphi to be better then Lazarus.
That is exactly almost literally counted in the first message of the thread.
Takin
Hello ,
NetBSD is not on fpc's list of supported operating systems, although there
is an older version available (1.0.10) which works fine, at least for my
purposes.
I've tried to compile the latest sources (svn), but :
system.pp(23,6) Error: Illegal unit name: SYSTEM
systemh.inc(26,4) Fatal: U
JclLogic.pas(1130,19) Error: Asm: [bts mem32,mem32] invalid combination
of opcode and operands
JclLogic.pas(1193,19) Error: Asm: [bt mem32,mem32] invalid combination
of opcode and operands
JclLogic.pas(1295,19) Error: Asm: [btc mem32,mem32] invalid combination
of opcode and operands
JclLogic.pas
> me the creeps because my last lines of assembler code were written 15
> years ago
Start with adding -Sd to the compiler command line. Putting the compiler in
delphi mode might help:-)
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
ht
For a quick start I did the following:
for file in /data/subversion/svn/jcl/source/common/*.pas
/data/subversion/svn/jcl/source/unix/*.pas ; do fpc -FE.
-Fu/data/subversion/svn/jcl/source/common/
-Fi/data/subversion/svn/jcl/source/ $file 2>&1 ; done | grep -i Error |
sort | uniq
This trie
Hi,
I think that we all agree now and we should close that thread.
Alain
On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 19:22 +0200, Sasa Zeman wrote:
> > Please do not come all the way here just to tell us that Lazarus is
> > not suitable as a RAD tool. This is typical Troll behavior.
>
> You people are really o
HI,
I think that we all agree now and we should close this thread.
Alain
On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 16:04 +0200, Sasa Zeman wrote:
> > The problem was when you kept insisting that the compiler wastes
> > memory and should be optimized (with a target of 128MB physical
>
> Please read all carfully,
> I am currently doing the switch from Kylix to FreePascal.
>
> Current versions of jcl do not compile very well with FreePascal on
> Linux because defines are missing.
Could you be more specific? Sometimes there is a gap in support for Kylix
apps because we want to avoid too many kylixisms/linu
Michael Ring wrote:
> I am currently doing the switch from Kylix to FreePascal.
>
> Current versions of jcl do not compile very well with FreePascal on
> Linux because defines are missing.
>
> Does somebody work on this right now?
Afaik not.
>
> If not, I will start on it, but first I want to
On 4/18/06, Sasa Zeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Please do not come all the way here just to tell us that Lazarus is
> > not suitable as a RAD tool. This is typical Troll behavior.
>
> You people are really odd... Please do not mis-interprete.
Then, what was your objective in starting this th
On 4/18/06, Sasa Zeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is highly unlikely that any project will stay OpenSource and free of
> charge forever. As example is popular RedHat where worked 100s, maybe 1000s
> of people (volonitiers and contributers). It become commercial since v 8.0.
Comercial is not c
> Disadvantages of Delphi:
> 2. It's closed source, if it's buggy you're lost.
Main problems comes from RTL and VCL, not a compiler - it is
stable, at least for D7. As D7 Pro+ comes with RTL and VCL sources, it is
easy to fix and recompile both. And there is many excelent free and
OpenSource third
> Please do not come all the way here just to tell us that Lazarus is
> not suitable as a RAD tool. This is typical Troll behavior.
You people are really odd... Please do not mis-interprete.
I spend most of my spare time and money to test FPC and Lazarus, post more
than several bug reports and su
> If FreePascal founders are registrated as a company, contract would have
> legitimity in the law, otherwise will not.
Incorporating into a registered company doesn't really help secure anything
down - for example Borland could cut off the Delphi product at any time (or sell
it) even though the
On 4/18/06, Sasa Zeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FPC and Lazarus are currently not sutable as a main tool RAD (at least on
> Winodows). If you have Delphi (7) Studio licensed RAD and developing
> commercial applications, you have seen real RAD tool in action:
Please do not come all the way here
I am currently doing the switch from Kylix to FreePascal.
Current versions of jcl do not compile very well with FreePascal on
Linux because defines are missing.
Does somebody work on this right now?
If not, I will start on it, but first I want to minimize the possibility
of doing work that a
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Sasa Zeman wrote:
Unless you have no interest at all in providing commercial grade
support, because it's just a hobby and you want to be free regarding
how much time you spend on it, on what you spend it.
Unless you calculate number od Delphi developer world wide.
I doub
Am Dienstag, den 18.04.2006, 15:27 +0200 schrieb Sasa Zeman:
> FPC and Lazarus are currently not sutable as a main tool RAD (at least on
> Winodows). If you have Delphi (7) Studio licensed RAD and developing
> commercial applications, you have seen real RAD tool in action:
That depends on the env
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Sasa Zeman wrote:
From: "Jonas Maebe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Since I testing FPC and Lazarus, I'm intersting in using it.
However, FPC and Lazarus currently cannot be competition
to Delphi/Kylix. But the most important advantages are daily
updates and upgrades and we hope
Sasa Zeman wrote:
>> The problem was when you kept insisting that the compiler wastes
>> memory and should be optimized (with a target of 128MB physical
>
> Please read all carfully, you mis-interpreting whole thing again.
>
> If you want more developers in the team, simply "yes or not" is not en
Sasa Zeman wrote:
> From: "Jonas Maebe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>> Since I testing FPC and Lazarus, I'm intersting in using it.
>>> However, FPC and Lazarus currently cannot be competition
>>> to Delphi/Kylix. But the most important advantages are daily
>>> updates and upgrades and we hope it
>>>
> The problem was when you kept insisting that the compiler wastes
> memory and should be optimized (with a target of 128MB physical
Please read all carfully, you mis-interpreting whole thing again.
If you want more developers in the team, simply "yes or not" is not enough.
Explain how else to kn
From: "Jonas Maebe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Since I testing FPC and Lazarus, I'm intersting in using it.
> > However, FPC and Lazarus currently cannot be competition
> > to Delphi/Kylix. But the most important advantages are daily
> > updates and upgrades and we hope it
> > will become worthy c
Is there any easy way to create big array of constants?
Does it matter (with maximum optimizations switches), if my >50 Kb array is
defined as constant?
That is: are there benefits from defining heavily used array as const versus
defining it as variable and filling data by program?
(For exampl
On 18 apr 2006, at 12:49, Sasa Zeman wrote:
With free and opensource product you made a trade with voluniers
and users
to make a reliable and popular product, based on your own (i.e, FPC
team)
vision and user's requests. I can suggest features which suits to
my own
needs (declared as a p
> In that case, you cannot make any sort of demands or set our
> priorities. You can voice your opinion of course (which you did), but
Please do not mis-interprete. I'm aware that any meber of FPC can be a bit
more sensitive, but that is not a reson for inpropriate behavior instead of
cultural arg
Marco van de Voort wrote:
>> Marco van de Voort wrote:
> EDO is more museum exponat and price is 10 times larger than the same
> memory
> size SD-RAM. The used memory is one module 128MB SD-RAM (PC100). I've
> manage
> to found only one 256MB module available on market with pr
> Marco van de Voort wrote:
> >>> EDO is more museum exponat and price is 10 times larger than the same
> >>> memory
> >>> size SD-RAM. The used memory is one module 128MB SD-RAM (PC100). I've
> >>> manage
> >>> to found only one 256MB module available on market with price of 50Euro,
> >>> but
>
On 18 apr 2006, at 03:38, Sasa Zeman wrote:
It seem that you missunderstood. As a developer, I'm not interested in
looking FPC code nor tracking future plans (details are alse never
published, only future plans), but using it to create working
applications.
In that case, you cannot make any
Marco van de Voort wrote:
>>> EDO is more museum exponat and price is 10 times larger than the same memory
>>> size SD-RAM. The used memory is one module 128MB SD-RAM (PC100). I've manage
>>> to found only one 256MB module available on market with price of 50Euro, but
>>> only incompatible PC133.
>
> > EDO is more museum exponat and price is 10 times larger than the same memory
> > size SD-RAM. The used memory is one module 128MB SD-RAM (PC100). I've manage
> > to found only one 256MB module available on market with price of 50Euro, but
> > only incompatible PC133.
>
> No, PC133 is backwards
On 17 apr 2006, at 23:37, Tomas Hajny wrote:
You can still sell CDs
with the compiled version (and offer paid
support, etc.), but at the same time, you must
make the sources freely available to anybody.
Actually, even then you would only have to make the source available
to the people that
Sasa Zeman wrote:
>>> FPC can be comparable with command line compiler of Delphi 7.
>> Yes? So Delphi has multi platform support and has maintainable compiler
>> sources?
>
> Multi platform support was not an issue here.
No? Most of fpc's complexity is caused by this. Just compare the speed and
m
40 matches
Mail list logo
