On Thu, 27 May 2010, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
El jue, 27-05-2010 a las 22:43 +0200, Michael Van Canneyt escribió:
It would be an interesting test to see how easy you could
re-create that in fcl-web.
Maybe we can learn something from this test, see how we
can improve and/or simplify things.
On 27 May 2010 20:04, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
Did fpWeb make it to Toolbox or one of the books? I'm getting curious
about it...
If I am not mistaken, Michael already wrote and article about it in
Toolbox. I vaguely remember something like that. Use the January
cover DVD (2010-01)
On 27 May 2010 21:25, waldo kitty wrote:
if x then begin
code
end else begin
if y then begin
code
end else begin
code
end;
end;
the above format hurts my eyes... i cannot see else, for one thing, and
cannot separate out the individual code blocks...
This is why I
On 05/27/2010 08:53 PM, Martin wrote:
On 26/05/2010 06:06, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
But why have an indentation after BEGIN? There is no new block to
start after BEGIN. I would indent like this:
begin
if foo then
begin
bar := foo;
Who is to say that the begin is part of the block?
On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 19:46 -0300, silvioprog wrote:
Em 27-05-2010 11:52, Michael Van Canneyt escreveu:
[...]
Requires the use of ExternalCGI feature in Apache, or the new
CGI-FastCGI gateway.
Please, do you know any article about it? I need to implement this
(FCGI) on my Linux (Ubuntu
On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 01:07 +0700, Bee Jay wrote:
On 27 Mei 2010, at 21:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
You can do this for fcgi as well, if you set the port number before
the Run statement. Requires the use of ExternalCGI feature in Apache, or
the new CGI-FastCGI gateway.
Can we have
On Fri, 28 May 2010 09:15:19 +0200
Graeme Geldenhuys graemeg.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 May 2010 21:25, waldo kitty wrote:
if x then begin
code
end else begin
if y then begin
code
end else begin
code
end;
end;
the above format hurts my eyes... i cannot
On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 15:16 -0300, silvioprog wrote:
Em 27-05-2010 06:36, Bee Jay escreveu:
Hi all,
I'm about to study fpWeb and its FCGI support. But I didn't see any example
that are using FCGI in SVN trunk. There are only CGIs and Apache modules.
Can they be used with FCGI simply
On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 15:36 -0300, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
Hi, I want to show a little example of an CGI app I created this weekend
using Lazarus with a package called FreeSpider, very similar to fpWeb.
It runs on a 512mb of ram Debian i386 server hosted in Argentina in a
shared hosting
On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 16:07 -0300, silvioprog wrote:
Em 27-05-2010 10:34, Marcos Douglas escreveu:
I agree but the Bee's thought it could make pascal more known to the
web developers it is right too.
if Delphi developers could use fpWeb on Delphi they would approach the
FPC as well.
Or
On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 22:49 +0200, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Thu, 27 May 2010, silvioprog wrote:
Em 27-05-2010 04:23, Michael Van Canneyt escreveu:
You may not be aware, but the TDBEdit is a mask edit. The mask must be set
in the field itself: TField.Editmask. It will be used by
On 05/27/2010 09:25 PM, waldo kitty wrote:
On 5/26/2010 14:26, Vannus wrote:
IMO thats redundant lines + more scrolling to read the code. whereas:-
if x then begin
code
end else begin
if y then begin
code
end else begin
code
end;
end;
the above format hurts my
On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 17:52 -0300, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
El jue, 27-05-2010 a las 22:43 +0200, Michael Van Canneyt escribió:
It would be an interesting test to see how easy you could
re-create that in fcl-web.
Maybe we can learn something from this test, see how we
can improve
On 28 May 2010 10:09, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Beware Graeme. Seeing reason behind madness might lead to madness ;)
:-)
Tabwidths is more like line endings and encodings. It should be per
file.
Maybe Lazarus can one day support editor style hints inside comments.
Some editors support this
On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 09:00 +0200, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 28 May 2010 01:50, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote:
No. Its necessary to be applied to fpc first. Lazarus support will come only
when a fpc version is released with the change.
And that would probably be a major release,
On 28 May 2010 10:27, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
Trolling again?
No and please drop the attitude!!
I was simply brining across my new found knowledge from a different
mailing list. New features are not allowed in fixes branch.
The DBMaskEdit is a change in the FCL. There are different rules
Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
New features are not allowed in fixes branch.
This is not carved in stone but a good thumb rule.
--
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
On 28 Mei 2010, at 15:01, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
Please, don't do what that link says. Why does everybody do so difficult
when then want to use fcgi? It's a common, widely used technology. Even
by php.
Well... it seems that not everybody is as smart as you are, Joost. Even many
people
On 28 Mei 2010, at 15:10, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
Gateway? Why?
There are some situations when gateway could provide a better solution.
That's even slower then normal cgi. Because the gateway is
in fact an cgi aplication that calls your fastcgi application.
I believe you already know
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 10:13:17AM +0200, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
I agree but the Bee's thought it could make pascal more known to the
web developers it is right too.
if Delphi developers could use fpWeb on Delphi they would approach the
FPC as well.
Or not. Who could guarantee
On 28 May 2010 10:45, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
This is not carved in stone but a good thumb rule.
So what is the criteria to get a new feature in the fixes branch
instead of having to wait months to a year-plus for the next major
release? If it's unit tests you want, I can supply that - no
On 27 Mei 2010, at 18:56, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I don't think we will do this. It will require too many changes.
Yes, I've seen the code. fpWeb has a very tight dependency to other fcl
packages. Poor Delphi people. ;)
-Bee-
--
___
Lazarus
On Fri, 28 May 2010, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 17:52 -0300, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
El jue, 27-05-2010 a las 22:43 +0200, Michael Van Canneyt escribió:
It would be an interesting test to see how easy you could
re-create that in fcl-web.
Maybe we can learn
On 28 Mei 2010, at 15:07, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
fpWeb is too much under development now. The interface may be
changed in the future, so it's not ready for 2.4.2.
Is it possible to compile them with 2.4.2? So, I could simply copy them
somewhere and use them with 2.4.2.
-Bee-
--
On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 10:32 +0200, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 28 May 2010 10:27, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
Trolling again?
No and please drop the attitude!!
I was simply brining across my new found knowledge from a different
mailing list. New features are not allowed in fixes branch.
Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
On 28 May 2010 10:45, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
This is not carved in stone but a good thumb rule.
So what is the criteria to get a new feature in the fixes branch
You've to ask the release manager about this ;)
--
___
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 11:22:43AM +0200, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
This is not carved in stone but a good thumb rule.
So what is the criteria to get a new feature in the fixes branch
You've to ask the release manager about this ;)
I merge compiler features only in the rare cases that I
On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 15:57 +0700, Bee Jay wrote:
On 28 Mei 2010, at 15:01, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
Please, don't do what that link says. Why does everybody do so difficult
when then want to use fcgi? It's a common, widely used technology. Even
by php.
Well... it seems that not
On 28 May 2010 11:22, Joost van der Sluis jo...@cnoc.nl wrote:
Where did I say (on the other list) that no new features are allowed in
the fixes branch? Nowhere.
It's a sad day for you that I have to quote your own emails.
Maybe not even 2.4.4, as it is really a new compiler-feature, not a
On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 16:00 +0700, Bee Jay wrote:
On 28 Mei 2010, at 15:10, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
Gateway? Why?
There are some situations when gateway could provide a better solution.
Can you name me one?
That's even slower then normal cgi. Because the gateway is
in fact an cgi
On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 16:17 +0700, Bee Jay wrote:
On 28 Mei 2010, at 15:07, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
fpWeb is too much under development now. The interface may be
changed in the future, so it's not ready for 2.4.2.
Is it possible to compile them with 2.4.2? So, I could simply copy them
On 28 Mei 2010, at 16:33, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
Can you name me one?
On hosting that only support CGI but not FCGI.
Well, according to me there is no reason why you would use fastcgi
besides speed. (Caching and startuptimes)
Yes. I meant the CGI gateway solution, I knew it's not that
On 28 Mei 2010, at 16:35, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
Yes, just copy the fcl-web from trunk over the one in fixes. When 2.4.2
is released we can also provide a fppkg package for that.
Ah, that's a relevation. I was afraid fpWeb is using special features that only
available on 2.5.1. I hope you
On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 11:32 +0200, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 28 May 2010 11:22, Joost van der Sluis jo...@cnoc.nl wrote:
Where did I say (on the other list) that no new features are allowed in
the fixes branch? Nowhere.
It's a sad day for you that I have to quote your own emails.
On 28 May 2010 09:32, Graeme Geldenhuys graemeg.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Double standards.
This has nothing to do with standards. I'm very glad they are a bit
more careful with the compiler, and I think everyone can appreciate
the reasons for this.
Henry
--
Hi,
[My first post here; please be forgiving.]
Quite sometime ago I worked with Anthony (wasn't much, mainly testing
and code suggestions etc.) for a while (2002-2003) on JEDI Code Format
(JCF).
At the time, especially when compared to DelForEx, JCF was noticeably
slow --basically because
Martin schrieb:
On 26/05/2010 06:06, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
But why have an indentation after BEGIN? There is no new block to
start after BEGIN. I would indent like this:
begin
if foo then
begin
bar := foo;
Who is to say that the begin is part of the block? (Anyone is free to
tread it
On 05/27/2010 11:36 AM, Bee Jay wrote:
I'm about to study fpWeb and its FCGI support. But I didn't see any example
that are using FCGI in SVN trunk. There are only CGIs and Apache modules. Can
they be used with FCGI simply by changing the used unit? I also couldn't find
any suffiecient docs
Vannus schrieb:
im looking for indents, your looking for begin/ends. i think this is
where 'what your used to' comes in..
It's not only use, it depends on how individual people perceive the
world. There are people that prefer dark text on a light background,
others hate that. We must
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
Tabwidths is more like line endings and encodings. It should be per
file.
It should be per user, regardless of files. But that may result in
conflicts with SVN, even if only tabs are used to indicate indentation
levels.
BTW when I wrote my C decompiler, the final
El vie, 28-05-2010 a las 10:22 +0200, Joost van der Sluis escribió:
On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 17:52 -0300, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
El jue, 27-05-2010 a las 22:43 +0200, Michael Van Canneyt escribió:
It would be an interesting test to see how easy you could
re-create that in fcl-web.
Hi!
Am 28.05.2010 14:12, schrieb Adem:
Given that I have some time to spare now, I would like to tackle using
FPC's own parser/tokenizer engine for a code formatter.
Trouble is, I am not familiar enough with the internals of FPC source
tree; meaning I don't even know where to begin looking for
On Fri, 28 May 2010, Adem wrote:
Hi,
[My first post here; please be forgiving.]
Quite sometime ago I worked with Anthony (wasn't much, mainly testing and
code suggestions etc.) for a while (2002-2003) on JEDI Code Format (JCF).
At the time, especially when compared to DelForEx, JCF was
On Fri, 28 May 2010 15:26:30 +0200
Sven Barth pascaldra...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi!
Am 28.05.2010 14:12, schrieb Adem:
Given that I have some time to spare now, I would like to tackle using
FPC's own parser/tokenizer engine for a code formatter.
Trouble is, I am not familiar enough
On 2010-05-28 16:32, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
IMHO: No. The FPC parser/tokenizer is not very forgiving about errors
in the code.
That means that as soon as an error is encountered, the parser stops
parsing. That in turn means that everything below the error will not be
formatted.
Michael.
2010/5/28 Žilvinas Ledas zilvinas.le...@dict.lt:
Yes, and this is frustrating - current JCF (integrated in Lazarus) does not
And the current JCF (integrated in Lazarus) doesn't format the code
exactly the same as the original JCF even with the exact same settings
file. :-(
--
Regards,
-
What I miss in all code formatters is formatting fragments. For example
when the codetools adds missing procedures or when a code template is
inserted or when some fragment is pasted from clipboard the IDE should
format this fragment with the user settings. For performance reasons
the formatter
On Fri, 28 May 2010, Adem wrote:
On 2010-05-28 16:32, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I'd also like to hear opinions whether I should spend time on this, or
even whether it is a good idea to use FPC's parser/tokenizer engine for
code formatter.
IMHO: No. The FPC parser/tokenizer is not very
Vannus wrote:
On 27 May 2010 20:25, waldo kitty wkitt...@windstream.net
mailto:wkitt...@windstream.net wrote:
On 5/26/2010 14:26, Vannus wrote:
IMO thats redundant lines + more scrolling to read the code.
whereas:-
if x then begin
code
end
But, I am hoping to modify the FPC parser/tokenizer so that instead
of it deciding whether to stop, it should do a callback and let the
caller decide whether it should stop.
Is this likely to be unworthy of the effort?
No, but it is hard to do in a meaningful way.
Could you (or someone
Am 28.05.2010 16:38, schrieb Adem:
But, I am hoping to modify the FPC parser/tokenizer so that instead
of it deciding whether to stop, it should do a callback and let the
caller decide whether it should stop.
Is this likely to be unworthy of the effort?
No, but it is hard to do in a
Martin wrote:
On 27/05/2010 11:30, Engelbert Buxbaum wrote:
Hi,
the code below is part of a program to draw the Mandelbrot-set. It
works, if the canvas is small (stamp-size). However, if the size is
increased to 800x800, the middle 1/3 of the image is replaced by a
vertical grey bar. Any
Jon Foster wrote:
I imagine its possible but I haven't a clue to know even where to beg in
looking. Is it possible to write to the root window in X (i386 Linux)?
I'd like to manipulate some images and write them there.
I can't remember if writing is supported, but DC := GetDC(0);
will give
Hi,
Whenever I used the Lazarus on Windows, has been through the binary
compiled. Simply download and install.
Now I'm want to install Lazarus on Windows but not
using the binaries already compiled. The reason is that I want to
use SVN to be able to make updates to the sources (FPC and
Lazarus)
Check out a local copy of http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/lazarus/trunk
in your tortoise svn...
Command prompt ..
make clean all
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Marcos Douglas m...@delfire.net wrote:
Hi,
Whenever I used the Lazarus on Windows, has been through the binary
compiled. Simply
On Fri, 28 May 2010, Adem wrote:
But, I am hoping to modify the FPC parser/tokenizer so that instead of it
deciding whether to stop, it should do a callback and let the caller
decide whether it should stop.
Is this likely to be unworthy of the effort?
No, but it is hard to do in a
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:08:02PM -0300, Marcos Douglas wrote:
Whenever I used the Lazarus on Windows, has been through the binary
compiled. Simply download and install.
Now I'm want to install Lazarus on Windows but not
using the binaries already compiled. The reason is that I want to
use
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
I installed jEdit yesterday. It supports a mammoth 177 different
syntax highlighter styles for all types of source code, text files
like xml/html/css, config files etc. They also use a combination of
regex and various code rules.
Hi,
as noted, regex can't parse any
On 5/28/2010 04:22, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
And anyone can help, it's no rocket science. Cgi is about writeln's
after all... ;)
and STDIN and STDOUT (plus environment vars) since everything travels that way
in CGIs ;)
heck, i've done CGIs written in plain old DOS .BAT files ;)
--
On 5/28/2010 05:03, Bee Jay wrote:
On 27 Mei 2010, at 18:56, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I don't think we will do this. It will require too many changes.
Yes, I've seen the code. fpWeb has a very tight dependency to other fcl
packages. Poor Delphi people. ;)
serve's'em right... what's that
On 5/28/2010 07:50, José Mejuto wrote:
Hello Lazarus-List,
Friday, May 28, 2010, 8:31:04 AM, you wrote:
FMdC On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:29 PM, José Mejutojoshy...@gmail.com wrote:
Get the MD5, SHA1 or SHA256 signature and check in
http://www.virustotal.com Most popular files have been
On 5/28/2010 09:17, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 28 May 2010 13:08, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
Tabwidths is more like line endings and encodings. It should be per
file.
It should be per user, regardless of files. But that may result in conflicts
with SVN, even if only tabs are used to
On 5/28/2010 10:13, Michael Schnell wrote:
On 05/28/2010 02:20 PM, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
A block is a sequence of commands that are executed step by step
one after the other.
begin and end are not executed, but just limitations of the block
they mark, so it's a matter of taste if they are
Hello Lazarus-List,
Friday, May 28, 2010, 6:09:36 PM, you wrote:
FMdC On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:29 PM, José
Mejutojoshy...@gmail.com wrote:
Get the MD5, SHA1 or SHA256 signature and check in
http://www.virustotal.com Most popular files have been already
checked. They currently run 39 AV
On 2010-05-28 18:13, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
Could you (or someone else) point me to the source files of FPC
parser/tokenizer please.
I can guess that it won't be easy; but if it can be done, I think it
should be.
It is the only way the code formatter can keep up with new features
of
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Marco van de Voort mar...@stack.nl wrote:
In the case of FPC on windows, best to install the last release
(2.4.0/win32), take a copy of that dir, and copy the handcompiled snapshot
over it.
On *nix you don't need the release so much, and a proper starting
Adem schrieb:
But, I am hoping to modify the FPC parser/tokenizer so that instead
of it deciding whether to stop, it should do a callback and let the
caller decide whether it should stop.
Is this likely to be unworthy of the effort?
No, but it is hard to do in a meaningful way.
Could you
On Fri, 28 May 2010 20:50:15 +0200
Florian Klaempfl flor...@freepascal.org wrote:
It is the only way the code formatter can keep up with new features of FPC.
FPC isn't moving that fast nowadays regarding syntax so keeping up
shouldn't be that hard.
Maybe not in the last month, but it
On 2010-05-28 21:50, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
It might be possible but the fpc scanner/parser are rather interwinded
with other parts of the compiler, just to name an example: pmodules.pas
parses units and programs but controls also code generation and handles
symtables etc. for them.
Adem schreef:
Is there a bounty sort of mechanism in this community?
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Bounties
Vincent
--
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
On 28 May 2010 21:06, Adem wrote:
I can guess that it would be hard to do, but I feel it will be absolutely
impossible without your (and the rest of compiler team's) blessing.
All I can say is: Good Luck!
I found a Oil Tanker more responsive and flexible than some of the
developers here.
On 28 May 2010 18:15, waldo kitty wrote:
i don't know if i can retrain my thumb to hit the TAB instead of the space
bar as it has been trained to do these past 30+ years i've been coding :? :P
:-)
The sad thing is, the Tab key was invented for indentation and
alignment, yet Pascal and many
On 28 May 2010 21:23, Graeme Geldenhuys graemeg.li...@gmail.com wrote:
I found a Oil Tanker more responsive and flexible than some of the
developers here. Maybe your approach of flashing money around might
win you some votes.
I've found an oil tanker, once, but it wasn't flexible.
--
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
On Fri, 28 May 2010 20:50:15 +0200
Florian Klaempfl flor...@freepascal.org wrote:
It is the only way the code formatter can keep up with new features of FPC.
FPC isn't moving that fast nowadays regarding syntax so keeping up
shouldn't be that hard.
Maybe not in
On 2010-05-28 23:23, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 28 May 2010 21:06, Adem wrote:
I can guess that it would be hard to do, but I feel it will be absolutely
impossible without your (and the rest of compiler team's) blessing.
All I can say is: Good Luck!
I found a Oil Tanker more
On 2010-05-28 23:45, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Would I have your blessing if I proposed a bounty to unentwine them so
that each one of those major modules becomes objects in tehir own right
--commnicating with one another through public/published events and
properties.
15 years ago I had
Em 28-05-2010 05:01, Joost van der Sluis escreveu:
Please, don't do what that link says. Why does everybody do so difficult
when then want to use fcgi? It's a common, widely used technology. Even
by php.
For example, when you are on fedora, just do 'yum install mod_fpcgid'
and it'll work.
Em 28-05-2010 05:10, Joost van der Sluis escreveu:
[...]
Fcgi is the same as cgi. Except that the process is started once and not
for each call. Nothing special here. (although you have to clean up all
stuf for the next request, offcourse. But you should that do for cgi
also, if you do it
Em 28-05-2010 05:22, Joost van der Sluis escreveu:
And anyone can help, it's no rocket science. Cgi is about writeln's
after all... ;)
Hhhh... True :)
Joost.
--
Silvio Clecio
$ programmer ObjectPascal - http://silvioprog.com.br
$ Acesse nosso canal IRC sobre Lazarus no Brasil -
Em 28-05-2010 06:35, Joost van der Sluis escreveu:
On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 16:17 +0700, Bee Jay wrote:
On 28 Mei 2010, at 15:07, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
fpWeb is too much under development now. The interface may be
changed in the future, so it's not ready for 2.4.2.
Is it possible to
80 matches
Mail list logo
