Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I don't consider storing a pointer in the tag is broken code, it was
considered the accepted way to maintain a pointer to your custom data
from a
standard control and there is often no simple alternative.
Accepted only because there was no other way.
The only corre
Anybody got some clues as to what is causing the "makeskel" program to crash?
Regrads,
- Graeme -
On 9/4/06, Graeme Geldenhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I am using the latest FPC 2.0.5 from SubVersion. (rev 4550). I am
trying to promote "fpdoc" to the tiOPF developers and hit a brick
Thanks for the explanation Tomas.
Regards,
- Graeme -
On 9/5/06, Tomas Hajny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If I create a bug fix, should I create a patch file against 2.1.1 or
> 2.0.x ? What is preferred?
First of all, 2.0.x is supposed to serve as fixes branch, so most
functional enhancemen
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> On 8/18/06, Vincent Snijders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I just updated the docs on sourceforge using fpdoc 2.1.1 and I see the
>> issue is fixed in 2.1.1. I will add a note in issues 2.0.4, that due to
>> a bug in xmlread, you cannot create the docs correctly with the
On 8/18/06, Vincent Snijders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I just updated the docs on sourceforge using fpdoc 2.1.1 and I see the
issue is fixed in 2.1.1. I will add a note in issues 2.0.4, that due to
a bug in xmlread, you cannot create the docs correctly with the 2.0.4 fpdoc.
Vincent
Hi,
How d
I have seen this issue come up with my own classes, and I get warnings about
portability from the compiler - the whole 32 to 64 bit warnings.
The point being is that you can often do some pretty neat things with
pointer math etc.
Concerning this particular thread - and this discussion about cha
