i reiterate that my Pascal-Actor-Model can do exactly what you are saying...
writing a "save file in background" type of actor is trivial, and the
synchronization is already done...
2012/10/31 Noah Silva :
> Hi Aldo,
>
> Well it's not just synch problems with threads, I've found threads to not be
Hi,
>but with Xcode 4.3 and later you have to install them separately
Really? I just had to link them from the appropriate folder in the XCode
application bundle (to the global binary folder). Perhaps this is because
I used to have 3.x on the same machine?
Thank you,
Noah Silva
2012/8/16 J
Hi Aldo,
Well it's not just synch problems with threads, I've found threads to not
be so reliable under FPC for anything but trivial test cases. Sometimes
the program is incredibly slowed when using threads. Also, Unix and
Windows have to be treated differently, etc. - which is not entirely FPC'
On 01 Nov 2012, at 00:24, Giuliano Colla wrote:
> Well, from the way Delphi File Mode are defined since the dawn of times, if
> you don't or fmWrite with anything, the default behavior is to open in
> fmShareCompat mode (=0), a legacy DOS mode tied to the long time dead FCB
> inherited from CP
Il 01/11/2012 00:24, Giuliano Colla ha scritto:
a legacy DOS mode tied to the long time dead FCB inherited from CP/1,
I meant CP/M, of course.
Giuliano
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/li
Il 31/10/2012 14:45, Jonas Maebe ha scritto:
On 31 Oct 2012, at 14:35, Giuliano Colla wrote:
Understood, thank you. But shouldn't it be the other way around, i.e.
one should explicitly request an exclusive lock?
No, that is how the behaviour of this function is defined. Looking at
the doc
Hello all,
Can anyone shed some light on this problem for me?
I am trying to configure FPC/Lazarus for Android Cross-Compiling. I
have followed the directions as indicated here:
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Android_Interface
but I get this error on compiling the project.
8< ---
On 31 Oct 2012, at 14:35, Giuliano Colla wrote:
Jonas Maebe ha scritto:
FPC 2.6 added support for file locking on Unix platforms. You
probably should use
USBOut := FileOpen(UsbDev,fmOpenWrite or fmShareDenyNone);
Otherwise FileOpen will try to get an exclusive (write) lock on
that d
Jonas Maebe ha scritto:
FPC 2.6 added support for file locking on Unix platforms. You
probably should use
USBOut :=
FileOpen(UsbDev,fmOpenWrite or fmShareDenyNone);
Otherwise FileOpen will try to get an exclusive (write) lock on
that device, which may well not be pos
On 31 Oct 2012, at 13:29, Giuliano Colla wrote:
In Linux environment the following code:
try
USBOut := FileOpen(UsbDev,fmOpenWrite);
except
result := True;
end;
is used in a Lazarus application to get a handle to write to an USB
device, and did work fine in fpc 2.4.
I migrated th
Hi,
here it is:
http://downloadit.pf-control.de/dl.php?ref=swig
Unfortunately I made the mistake and did the work on a non version controlled
folder - therefore it is whole swig and not just a patch :(
Feel free to move the file to any other - possibly more "central" - place and
hopefully there
In Linux environment the following code:
try
USBOut := FileOpen(UsbDev,fmOpenWrite);
except
result := True;
end;
is used in a Lazarus application to get a handle to write to an USB
device, and did work fine in fpc 2.4.
I migrated the application to Lazarus 1.0 wich uses fpc 2.6,
If I correctly understood, the flag field is to find arguments. If it
remains "nil", the argument was not found, otherwise, it's a pointer
to the short option.
2012/10/30, Henry Vermaak :
> On 30/10/12 10:05, luciano de souza wrote:
>> Hello listers,
>> Getopts offers very good features to proces
Am 16.10.2012 12:59, schrieb Michael Fuchs:
...
It works, but the heap trace shows a bunch of memory leaks.
...
Is this a bug or am I doing something wrong?
For information: I created an entry in the bug tracker for this problem:
http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=23247
Michael
_
In our previous episode, Mark Morgan Lloyd said:
> > You try to build with 2.6.1.
>
> That could very easily be misread as "You should try to build with
> 2.6.1", correct idiomatic English would be "You are trying to build with
> 2.6.1.", or to rub their nose in it "You are trying to build wit
On 2012-10-31 07:09, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
> start it now.". If we're trying to make it "bloody idiot proof" then the
> correct form is "you are trying" or "you have tried".
That make sense. Could Marco or somebody update the grammar in that
message?
Regards,
- Graeme -
On 31-10-2012 8:09, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
> Sven Barth wrote:
> I'm definitely not complaining about the check, I agree with it. But to
> somebody with English as their first/only language "You try" is an
> imperative, as in "I've cleared the bubbles in the fuel line, you try to
> start it now."
Sven Barth wrote:
I really don't like making this comment, but looking at the bug report
(and checking the current Makefile)
> You try to build with 2.6.1.
That could very easily be misread as "You should try to build with
2.6.1", correct idiomatic English would be "You are trying to build wi
18 matches
Mail list logo
