On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 23:14:34 +0200
Florian Klaempfl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
> > I want to read ppu files like the ppudump tool.
> > ppudump uses the unit compiler/ppu.pp, but ppu.ppu is not
> > installed by default. At least not on debian.
> >
> > Should I make a co
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 8:58 AM, Richard Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I am curious about is why are people porting programs from other
> platforms to the Mac?
Because other people are paying them? Obviously those people paying
developers to port apps to Macs beliave they will sell those
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
I want to read ppu files like the ppudump tool.
ppudump uses the unit compiler/ppu.pp, but ppu.ppu is not
installed by default. At least not on debian.
Should I make a copy of this unit?
No ;)
Will this work for the various compilers (e.g. compiling the tool with
2.
I want to read ppu files like the ppudump tool.
ppudump uses the unit compiler/ppu.pp, but ppu.ppu is not
installed by default. At least not on debian.
Should I make a copy of this unit?
Will this work for the various compilers (e.g. compiling the tool with
2.2.3 and reading 2.2.x and 2.3.x ppu fi
What I am curious about is why are people porting programs from other
platforms to the Mac?
Simply because there is demand. Most of what is said goes for direct
sales
to mac people, which is often not the case for these ported
software. It is
a distinction that I somewhat miss in these di
On 24 Jun 2008, at 15:02, Marco van de Voort wrote:
On 24 Jun 2008, at 14:18, Marco van de Voort wrote:
prefered way,
and invest massively in some ObjC solution, to not miss some word of
mouth
or a pat on the shoulder from Apple and/or partners.
Even several Mac-only developers do not do thi
> On 24 Jun 2008, at 14:18, Marco van de Voort wrote:
> > prefered way,
> > and invest massively in some ObjC solution, to not miss some word of
> > mouth
> > or a pat on the shoulder from Apple and/or partners.
>
> Even several Mac-only developers do not do this because they have too
> much i
On 24 Jun 2008, at 14:18, Marco van de Voort wrote:
If the devels targeting Mac with portable suites were so Mac centric
and
perfectionist as described in this thread, they would go the Apple
prefered way,
and invest massively in some ObjC solution, to not miss some word of
mouth
or a pat
On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Roland Turcan wrote:
> Hello FPC-Pascal users discussions!
>
> How can I build a shared library which contains many bitmaps loaded
> dynamically from the code using by:
>
> procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject);
> CONST MYRES_DLL='./libmyres.so';
> begin
> F
Hello FPC-Pascal users discussions!
How can I build a shared library which contains many bitmaps loaded
dynamically from the code using by:
procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject);
CONST MYRES_DLL='./libmyres.so';
begin
FhMod := LoadLibrary (PCHAR (MYRES_DLL));
IF FhMod = 0 THEN b
> What I am curious about is why are people porting programs from other
> platforms to the Mac?
Simply because there is demand. Most of what is said goes for direct sales
to mac people, which is often not the case for these ported software. It is
a distinction that I somewhat miss in these discu
Jonas writes:
we even have administrative people at our university who have
learned to be somewhat efficient with our SAP implementation, which
is universally recognised by everyone here as a the most horrible
user interface they have ever used).
--
Funny you mention this because m
On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Adriaan van Os wrote:
> Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
> > I invite you to visit ALL our customers. Most of them don't even
> > understand what a folder is. They *really* don't care about the
> > rules you mention. Most of them would even be far more happy with
> > a plain DO
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I invite you to visit ALL our customers. Most of them don't even
understand what a folder is. They *really* don't care about the
rules you mention. Most of them would even be far more happy with
a plain DOS application.
As our support staff says:
The best application
A new version of Allegro.pas was released yesterday. Allegro.pas is a
wrapper to allow Pascal compilers (such as Free Pascal) to use the
Allegro library in games or multimedia programs.
This version introduces new functions that allows to create, write and
read files using the LZSS compression alg
On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
> On 24 Jun 2008, at 09:29, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
> >But for a company that has 'Think different' as a motto the
> >insistence on adherence to the rules is ironic :-)
>
> Actually, it makes perfect sense since it's apparently so different from
On 24 Jun 2008, at 11:27, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
The layout or look of the dialogs might be different, but fundamentaly
they work identical. This is what I'm trying to get across. Any Mac or
Windows user will be able to use the fpGUI dialogs without training!
I don't doubt that for second.
2008/6/24 Jonas Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> That said: if people are in front of your application five days out of seven
> from 9 to 5, it is indeed probably less important to be consistent with
> anything else. The learning curve may be fairly steep, but that doesn't
> matter since companies alwa
On 24 Jun 2008, at 09:29, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
But for a company that has 'Think different' as a motto the
insistence on adherence to the rules is ironic :-)
Actually, it makes perfect sense since it's apparently so different
from what you are used to that you consider it a completely
2008/6/24 Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> But for a company that has 'Think different' as a motto the
> insistence on adherence to the rules is ironic :-)
:-)
> Secondly, all things you mention apply to advanced users only,
> and I dare say to developers only:
>
> I invite you to vi
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 09:10:25AM +0200, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
> Seweryn Walentynowicz schrieb:
>> Testing on linux and windows FPC version, works the same: crashes
>> version compiled without -a option..
> It uses the external assembler which makes in theory no difference, in
> practice it mak
On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
> On 23 Jun 2008, at 18:00, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 23 Jun 2008, Jonas Maebe wrote:
> >
> > >On 23 Jun 2008, at 10:41, Bent Normann Olsen wrote:
> > >
> > > >Yup, I know, but it's a 1-1 port from Win32 to Mac,
> > >
> > >That's really a
Seweryn Walentynowicz schrieb:
Testing on linux and windows FPC version, works the same: crashes
version compiled without -a option..
I don't understand this, cause -a switch is "the compiler doesn't delete
the generated assembler file", and in any form shouldn't touch generated
code.
It uses t
Simply program file with assembler code:
program Buggy;
{$asmmode intel}
procedure TestProc; Assembler;
asm
jcxz @@odd
@@odd:
end;
begin
TestProc;
writeln('OK');
end.
and now I compile it and run with -a option :
$ fpc -a BUGGY.PAS
Free Pascal Compiler version 2.0.4 [2006/09/16] for i386
Co
24 matches
Mail list logo
