On 29 February 2012 19:52, Michael Van Canneyt mich...@freepascal.orgwrote:
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
On 29-2-2012 17:07,
michael.vancanneyt-**0is9kj9s...@public.gmane.orgmichael.vancanneyt-0is9kj9s...@public.gmane.orgwrote:
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Frank Church wrote:
Sven,
No, I used it only in TW var section of various methods as a temporary
structure. I should note that this compiled in FPC 2.4 fine.
(that said, the source code in question is quite messy...)
-- Noah
On 2012/03/01, at 16:17, Sven Barth pascaldra...@googlemail.com wrote:
Am 01.03.2012
Sven,
It's not used as a unit name, but there might be something somewhere
hiding, so I am not ready to file a bug report on it yet.
It's probably better to make another demo program with less cruft.
-- Noah
On 2012/03/01, at 16:13, Sven Barth pascaldra...@googlemail.com wrote:
Am
On 29-2-2012 20:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
On 29-2-2012 17:07, michael.vancanneyt-0is9kj9s...@public.gmane.org
wrote:
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Frank Church wrote:
Another question, are you and Florian Klaempfl the main or only
Hi leledumbo,
I also tend to Think it's something like that with non-scoped records or
something similar. (this is mostly non-oop code, but there are record types
with members called tile in other units that get pulled in...)
However the compiler specifically names other units as the culprit,
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Frank Church wrote:
On 29 February 2012 19:52, Michael Van Canneyt mich...@freepascal.orgwrote:
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
On 29-2-2012 17:07,
michael.vancanneyt-**0is9kj9s...@public.gmane.orgmichael.vancanneyt-0is9kj9s...@public.gmane.orgwrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
On 29-2-2012 20:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
On 29-2-2012 17:07, michael.vancanneyt-0is9kj9s...@public.gmane.org
wrote:
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Frank Church wrote:
Another question, are you and
On 1-3-2012 9:16, Frank Church wrote:
On 29 February 2012 19:52, Michael Van Canneyt mich...@freepascal.org
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
I'd love to see that patch committed or get some feedback on it ;)
But there were quite some errors in the XML, which is
On 1-3-2012 9:43, michael.vancann...@wisa.be wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
On 29-2-2012 20:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
On 29-2-2012 17:07, michael.vancanneyt-0is9kj9s...@public.gmane.org
wrote:
On Wed, 29 Feb
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
When that didn't throw up errors and generated a valid ibconnection.chm,
I didn't look for any further errors.
It should have given you the same errors as I got. But it will produce a
chm file, simply with some parts missing.
Originally, fpdoc
On 01 Mar 2012, at 09:29, Noa Shiruba wrote:
It's not used as a unit name, but there might be something
somewhere hiding, so I am not ready to file a bug report on it yet.
It's probably better to make another demo program with less cruft.
It's possible that compiling with -vh will make
Martin wrote:
On 27/02/2012 12:32, Lukasz Sokol wrote:
On 26/02/2012 11:17, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 11:43:38 +0100 (CET) Michael Van Canneyt
mich...@freepascal.org wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2012, Vinzent Höfler wrote:
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 19:15:54 +0100, ik
On 1 March 2012 10:49, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
I understand why you changed it, but didn't get any error messages
either - just redownloaded the original patch upload to make sure:
Strange. I did the same test, and got lots of errors. And I get the
same errors if I generate CHM or HTML
On 1 March 2012 10:55, michael.vancanneyt@w... wrote:
But I don't use chm, but latex. I suppose the xml-html converter is more
forgiving about mistakes in your XML; maybe it takes some shortcuts. I would
have to investigate.
Nope, I get the exact same errors even if I generate HTML or CHM
On 1-3-2012 10:29, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 1 March 2012 10:49, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
I understand why you changed it, but didn't get any error messages
either - just redownloaded the original patch upload to make sure:
Strange. I did the same test, and got lots of errors. And I get
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Sven Barth
pascaldra...@googlemail.com wrote:
Am 28.02.2012 20:31, schrieb Lukasz Stafiniak:
(1) A declaration part, that parallels var, with keyword val or
let (since val is taken up by a procedure). It introduces named
values, i.e. non-assignable variables.
Why are type-parametric definitions called generics in Pascal? It
seems to me their semantics is like templates in C++, not like
generics in Java/C# (or ML languages).
Regards.
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
In our previous episode, Lukasz Stafiniak said:
(2) Closures. That is, making local functions that only use const
arguments and val / let variables safe to return from the outer
function. This can be done by allocating the val / let data on the
heap, or perhaps easier by copying them into
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Lukasz Stafiniak lukst...@gmail.com wrote:
Wow, I didn't know about that! Still, it is not clear to me it is a
good thing to capture var variables in the closure. It goes against
the semantics of normal nested functions. It's a dirty but flexible
solution --
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:29 AM, leledumbo leledumbo_c...@yahoo.co.id wrote:
That's different case IMHO (In My Humble Observation), I guess it's something
like this:
{$mode objfpc}
type
TTestClass = class
FTile: Integer;
property Tile: Integer read FTile write FTile;
procedure
Am 01.03.2012 12:29 schrieb Lukasz Stafiniak lukst...@gmail.com:
Why are type-parametric definitions called generics in Pascal? It
seems to me their semantics is like templates in C++, not like
generics in Java/C# (or ML languages).
They are named generics, because they are generic as in can
On 01.03.2012 16:34, Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:29 AM, leledumboleledumbo_c...@yahoo.co.id wrote:
That's different case IMHO (In My Humble Observation), I guess it's something
like this:
{$mode objfpc}
type
TTestClass = class
FTile: Integer;
property Tile:
Oh, I see. It has sense. The extra implicit parameter part
confused me because I didn't use OOP in that project.
Thank you :)
2012/3/1 fpc-pascal-requ...@lists.freepascal.org:
From: Sven Barth pascaldra...@googlemail.com
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Weird compilation warnings
Am 29.02.2012
However the compiler specifically names other units as the culprit, so who
knows.
Yep, and according to the error message, what if you open the corresponding
unit at the position told by the compiler?
Hint: Your form must be a descendant of TForm which perhaps has... guess it
;)
--
View this
24 matches
Mail list logo
