Hi,
I'm maybe lost in the doc searches, but is there a reference explaining the
extended err codes for fpOpen and friends?
I could not find one.
The effort is a Linux/Pentium fifo read by cgi but fails to read a piped
fifo built with RW permission / shared.
cgi:
Program pipe_read;
uses BaseUni
John Coppens wrote:
> Just an extra note: delay(1) seems to delay 4.1 ms, so it _does_ seem to
> be possible to do less than 8.3?
You wait till the next tick that is after the requested delay. So it's
never a HZ multiple or so.
Micha
___
fpc-pascal mail
On Thu, 8 Nov 2007 13:43:48 +0100
Rainer Stratmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RDTSC
Interesting... I'm guessing gettimeofday would use this register to
obtain the hi-res time it provides - does it?
Thanks
John
___
fpc-pas
Op Thu, 8 Nov 2007, schreef Bee:
> > Generally 2.2.1 is reliable, but bugfixes can have unforseen effects. You
> > will have to weigh the advantage of the bugfixes against unforseen
> > effects by those fixes. We cannot make that choice for you.
>
> Understood. Say I'd like to apply some update
Carsten Bager schrieb:
> I have built a Win32 ppcrossarm.exe (2.20) compiler. The compiler works
> ok. The output from the Linux and the Win32 compiler when I use the -sh
> directive is exactly the same. The downside is I have some problems
> finding a Win32 linker that I can use.
>
> If I comp
If you know the Processor Speed (MHz) then there is an assembler command which
reads the cpu cycles (for example a 1MHz Processor has 1.000.000
cycles/second) so you can do it in this way.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RDTSC
Rainer
Am Mittwoch, 7. November 2007 23:27 schrieb John Coppens:
> Hi
* Marc Santhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Thu, 08 Nov 2007 11:37:11
+0100]:
But all this OLE Automation stuff is windows only.
For being cross platform you have to use a bridge between the compiler
in use and the office software.
I remember of it. Thetefore i have thus obstination regarding to UNO.
Am Donnerstag, den 08.11.2007, 12:11 +0300 schrieb Andrey Gusev:
> * Marc Santhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Thu, 08 Nov 2007 05:47:06
> +0100]:
> > But what about the other ones?
>
> I cannot get even the clean comprehension - may fpc operate automated
> interfaces or not (in delphi style or somehow
Generally 2.2.1 is reliable, but bugfixes can have unforseen effects. You
will have to weigh the advantage of the bugfixes against unforseen effects
by those fixes. We cannot make that choice for you.
Understood. Say I'd like to apply some updates/fixes (into my v.2.2.0
installation) but rejec
Op Thu, 8 Nov 2007, schreef Bee:
> Hi all,
>
> I know latest stable release of fpc is v.2.2.0. But the latest updates and bug
> fixes are done on v.2.2.1. I found some serious updates and bug fixes are
> already done on v.2.2.1. But, is it safe to use v.2.2.1 for production use? Or
> should I s
Hi all,
I know latest stable release of fpc is v.2.2.0. But the latest updates
and bug fixes are done on v.2.2.1. I found some serious updates and bug
fixes are already done on v.2.2.1. But, is it safe to use v.2.2.1 for
production use? Or should I stick with v.2.2.0 for production use?
I kn
> I guess it is linker script related. Unfortunatly FPC comes with an
> integrated linker script however it seems there is no generic one.
>
> Try to compare the various linker scripts to narrow it down. From ld you
> get it with
> ld --verbose
> From FPC you get it when compiling with -s:
> it's
* Andrey Gusev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Thu, 08 Nov 2007 12:11:44 +0300]:
I make direct post to Florian Klaempfl - he keep silence. It seems
Correction: meanwhile i write the previous post - i get post from
Florian...
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pasca
Carsten Bager schrieb:
> I have built a Win32 ppcrossarm.exe (2.20) compiler. The compiler works
> ok. The output from the Linux and the Win32 compiler when I use the -sh
> directive is exactly the same. The downside is I have some problems
> finding a Win32 linker that I can use.
>
> If I comp
* Marc Santhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Thu, 08 Nov 2007 05:47:06
+0100]:
But what about the other ones?
I cannot get even the clean comprehension - may fpc operate automated
interfaces or not (in delphi style or somehow yet, fully or partially) ?
FPC 2.2 reference, pg.40: "Remark: Dispatch inter
On 08 Nov 2007, at 00:16, L wrote:
Because of the ridiculous GPL license which freepascal uses, which
isn't as free
as a BSD/NRCOL/MIT license.
Please take your license flaming elsewhere, it is completely off
topic on this list.
Jonas
FPC lists moderator
___
16 matches
Mail list logo
