Martin Schreiber wrote:
On Friday 11 August 2006 13.58, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 13:42:49 +0200
Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Recently the behaviour of the 'protected' keyword has changed in fpc
2.1.1. Now I wonder how can I fix the cod
Jonas Maebe wrote:
> Internally, the compiler uses a shortstring (max 255) characters to
> build the "ar" command line. It currently passes three file names at
> a time to "ar", so the currently max is about 80 characters per dir
> +filename.
Executive summary: This fails when the longest filenam
On 8/11/06, Mattias Gaertner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks for the good example. With the protected method you can easily do
dangerous things, like adding an action twice or forgetting to remove it. With
the 'protected' AddAction you could do such things only with dirty tricks like
the abo
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 15:45:00 +0200
"Graeme Geldenhuys" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/11/06, Mattias Gaertner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Where do you read here anything about 'current instance'?
>
> Maybe not in that snippet of text, but I read it somewhere... ;-)
:)
> > And it was ve
On 8/11/06, Mattias Gaertner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Where do you read here anything about 'current instance'?
Maybe not in that snippet of text, but I read it somewhere... ;-)
And it was very Delphi compatible. I mean, how many Delphians noticed the
difference at all? It didn't hurt an
2006/8/11, Mattias Gaertner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 14:49:16 +0200
"Graeme Geldenhuys" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/11/06, Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It seems normal to me that it is not just the current instance. You KNOW
this
> > method is there,
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 14:49:16 +0200
"Graeme Geldenhuys" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/11/06, Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It seems normal to me that it is not just the current instance. You KNOW
> > this
> > method is there, in a descendent, so it seems logical that you
I managed to Copy and Paste the text, for thouse that can't view the
attached image from my previous post...
---
A private member is invisible outside of the unit or program where
its class is declared. In other words, a private method cannot be
called from another module,
On 8/11/06, Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It seems normal to me that it is not just the current instance. You KNOW this
method is there, in a descendent, so it seems logical that you know that it
exists for another instance as well.
Coming from a Delphi background, I disagree
On Friday 11 August 2006 13.58, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 13:42:49 +0200
>
> Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> > > Recently the behaviour of the 'protected' keyword has changed in fpc
> > > 2.1.1. Now I wonder how can I fix the code, that
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Recently the behaviour of the 'protected' keyword has changed in fpc
2.1.1.
Now I wonder how can I fix the code, that depends on this.
Redesign
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 13:42:49 +0200
Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> > Recently the behaviour of the 'protected' keyword has changed in fpc 2.1.1.
> > Now I wonder how can I fix the code, that depends on this.
>
> Redesign :)
Of FPC? Naaah, too much work. ;)
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Recently the behaviour of the 'protected' keyword has changed in fpc
2.1.1.
Now I wonder how can I fix the code, that depends on this.
Redesign :)
I have some base classes, that defines meth
On 11 aug 2006, at 13:35, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
I have some base classes, that defines methods to let derived
classes interact.
These methods should not be accessed directly from the outside, so
they are protected. But this does not work any longer. Of course I
can safely typecast, but f
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Recently the behaviour of the 'protected' keyword has changed in fpc 2.1.1.
Now I wonder how can I fix the code, that depends on this.
Redesign :)
I have some base classes, that defines methods to let derived classes
i
Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Recently the behaviour of the 'protected' keyword has changed in fpc 2.1.1.
Now I wonder how can I fix the code, that depends on this.
Redesign :)
I have some base classes, that defines methods to let derived classes interact.
These methods should not be accessed dire
Recently the behaviour of the 'protected' keyword has changed in fpc 2.1.1.
Now I wonder how can I fix the code, that depends on this.
I have some base classes, that defines methods to let derived classes interact.
These methods should not be accessed directly from the outside, so they are
protec
> Some wish. Please change constant "max_elems" in unit tply\LexBase.pas to
> 1024.
Done in trunk (to 1000 actually)
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Some wish. Please change constant "max_elems" in
unit tply\LexBase.pas to 1024.
Thanks
Aleksey Y. Ulasevich (STAKANOV)icq:26493224 http://stakanov.narod.ru
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/
Hello,
solution you can find in file "c:\pp\source\docs\go32ex\intpm.pas".Best regards
-- Lubomir Cabla/CBLWeb page : http://www.hdat2.com/Web forum: http://www.getphpbb.com/phpbb/index.php?mforum=lcabla
{ This example shows how to redirect a software interrupt by
changing the protected mode ha
20 matches
Mail list logo
