On Wed, 5 Oct 2016 09:11:51 +0200, LacaK wrote:
>writeln(LowerCase(US)); // prints ÁÉÍ
>writeln(UnicodeLowerCase(US)); // prints áéí
>
> Why first LowerCase() does nothing while second wroks as expected?
>
SysUtils.LowerCase is only supposed to work on ascii characters.
From manu
Thanks Graeme. ;-)
Fre;D
-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context:
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Smart-Link-definition-tp5726480p5726498.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
Fred's post seems to mainly
Marco van de Voort wrote
> Fred's post seems to mainly
> be about biarchs though, and that is a completely different story.
Sadly no.
No more biarch because no more FreeBSD32.
Fre;D
-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context:
http://free-pascal-ge
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
>
> But they just recently added support for RaspberryPi. Does that mean
> FreeBSD on RaspberryPi will now also discontinue? If so, there goes my
> idea of using RPi's as small stand-alone servers. :-/
Well, that would probably only involve current
Am 07.10.2016 17:19 schrieb "Graeme Geldenhuys" <
mailingli...@geldenhuys.co.uk>:
>
> On 2016-10-07 14:38, fredvs wrote:
> > It is extremely sad and I do not understand why to stop 32 bit
development.
>
> But they just recently added support for RaspberryPi. Does that mean
> FreeBSD on RaspberryPi
On 07/10/2016 18:33 μμ, Marcos Douglas wrote:
We don't need "clean up properly" instances that is interface-based.
If this solve the problem for contained objects, I'll do it!
BUT, if I do this I can forget all about TContainedObject or
TAggregatedObject? If I can't, this not make sense.
OK th
On 07/10/2016 18:33 μμ, Marcos Douglas wrote:
The problem is: The user (programmer) needs to know (previously) if
such classes can or not be used as a contained object!
True then again that is true for all objects not only interfaces. You
need to understand what they address how they address i
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Marcos Douglas wrote:
>> For me extending the TContainedObject to support both contained and stand
>> alone use is trivial I bet you can do it as well now that you know where to
>> look.
>
> That is a good idea.
>
> If is possible. If doesn't have any "compiler mag
On 2016-10-07 14:19, fredvs wrote:
> I can say that it tells the compiler to remove unneeded symbols but it is
> only my feeling.
Yes, that is pretty much what it does. At the linking stage the compiler
can determine what code is never used and exclude that from the binary -
normally with a huge r
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 11:46 AM, stdreamer wrote:
> On 07/10/2016 16:12 μμ, Marcos Douglas wrote:
>>
>> The team shouldn't know about the hierarchy; about how was implemented
>> these classes.
>> They can use TDataStream directly or as a contained object.
>> But as I understood, we need to use TCo
On 2016-10-07 14:38, fredvs wrote:
> It is extremely sad and I do not understand why to stop 32 bit development.
But they just recently added support for RaspberryPi. Does that mean
FreeBSD on RaspberryPi will now also discontinue? If so, there goes my
idea of using RPi's as small stand-alone serv
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Tony Whyman
wrote:
> ...As a workaround for the interface delegation problem it works, as long as
> you don't try and use TDelegateClass on its own
As I said... sad.
Regards,
Marcos Douglas
___
fpc-pascal maillist - f
On 07/10/2016 16:12 μμ, Marcos Douglas wrote:
The team shouldn't know about the hierarchy; about how was implemented
these classes.
They can use TDataStream directly or as a contained object.
But as I understood, we need to use TContainedObject or
TAggregatedObject only in these "special cases"
Y
On 07/10/16 12:29, stdreamer wrote:
No! Delegation is a mechanism, when used, you have to know exactly how
it works. Delegation is only used to minimize code instead of writing
a bunch of procedures that call the contained object's methods. That's
it and nothing more.
I believe that I now und
Am 2016-10-07 um 13:29 schrieb stdreamer:
> Erm knifes are easy to use as well but cutting your self with one is your
problem to solve.
Today many industrial (and household) machines are a lot safer than decades ago.
This has changed because so many people got (heavily) injured.
Therefore these
On 07/10/16 12:29, stdreamer wrote:
The point is that you are trying to equate delegation with contained
objects/interfaces and that is not what delegates are about.
Delegation has nothing to do with the underlined mechanism you choose
to use.
Hmm, not so sure about that. I have updated my o
Hello.
Once again (like always) fpc is whiter than white.
FreeBSD has decided to stop FreeBSD 32 bit and that smart-link problem is
known but they do not want to fix it because of stopping FreeBSD 32 bit
development.
It is extremely sad and I do not understand why to stop 32 bit development.
Fr
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 8:29 AM, stdreamer wrote:
> No! Delegation is a mechanism, when used, you have to know exactly how it
> works.
The "mechanism" here is about using [implements].
We have to know what is the sintaxe:
- declare a property
- use [implements] keyword
- could be a class or interf
OK, somebody knows there what is smart-link.
Sorry for the noise.
Fre;D
-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context:
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Smart-Link-definition-tp5726480p5726481.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_
Hello.
Who can explain what is smart linking ?
I can say that it tells the compiler to remove unneeded symbols but it is
only my feeling.
There are no explanation in wikipedia and Googling did not help.
I ask you this because in FreeBSD forum they want to know what is smart-link
(https://forums.
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 6:49 AM, Tony Whyman
wrote:
> The problem being referred to is the functionality described here:
>
> http://freepascal.org/docs-html/current/ref/refse44.html#x98-127.4
>
> under the title "Interface delegation". The word "contained" does not appear
> here. Maybe it shoul
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 7:30 AM, Tony Whyman
wrote:
> Reference Counted interfaces must be easy to use and should not require the
> user to have advanced knowledge of how they work. If that last point is true
> then all the that nay-sayers that argue against reference counted interfaces
> have thei
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 6:31 AM, stdreamer wrote:
>
> Τhe problem of a contained interface has already been solved, see the
> TContainedObject. To sum it up a contained object reference counting
> mechanism increments and decrements the container's reference counter it
> does not have a life of its
On 07/10/2016 13:30 μμ, Tony Whyman wrote:
On 07/10/16 11:08, stdreamer wrote:
I see no rabbit hole or any other problem in the code posted so far
except perhaps lack of proper clean up which might be intentional.
A Rabbit Hole is not the same as a bug and my point is not that
"interface delega
On 07/10/16 11:08, stdreamer wrote:
I see no rabbit hole or any other problem in the code posted so far
except perhaps lack of proper clean up which might be intentional.
A Rabbit Hole is not the same as a bug and my point is not that
"interface delegation" does not work, it is that it is count
On 07/10/2016 12:49 μμ, Tony Whyman wrote:
You seem to be playing around with words. Perhaps I am guilty of sloppy
English when I say "interface is copied" when meaning "an interface
reference is copied". However, this does not change the underlying problem.
The problem being referred to is the f
You seem to be playing around with words. Perhaps I am guilty of sloppy
English when I say "interface is copied" when meaning "an interface
reference is copied". However, this does not change the underlying problem.
The problem being referred to is the functionality described here:
http://free
On 2016-10-07 10:04, Tony Whyman wrote:
> everything to do with the Firebird Client library DLL or ".so". You will
> need Firebird 3 for IPv6
Many thanks for that information.
Regards,
Graeme
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.
On 2016-10-07 10:26, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
> I think this is mandated by one or the other RFCs, it's not just an
> Apache thing.
It seems you are correct. After posting the message I searched some more
and got a link to the Firebird Bug Tracker where they mentioned the same
thing you did.
Reg
On 05/10/2016 19:13 μμ, Tony Whyman wrote:
Marcos,
I believe I concluded that this could be a bug or feature. Either way it
is a Bear Trap waiting for the unwary programmer and it would be nice if
in some way the implementation could be improved. The problem, as I see
it is:
Basics:
1. Wheneve
On 07/10/16 09:00, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Apache Web Server changes the syntax for IPv6 connections to
[]:
where the [ and ] are literal characters.
I think this is mandated by one or the other RFCs, it's not just an
Apache thing.
I'd suggest that your question actually has two parts:
On 07/10/16 09:43, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
1. Does fcl-db code support connecting to databases (any DB servers)
listening to IPv6 connections?
2. Does anybody know how to tell Firebird RDBMS to listen to IPv6
connections? From the 'netstat -a' output I can see that
my Firebir
Hi,
A couple of questions...
1. Does fcl-db code support connecting to databases (any DB servers)
listening to IPv6 connections?
2. Does anybody know how to tell Firebird RDBMS to listen to IPv6
connections? From the 'netstat -a' output I can see that
my Firebird server is only
33 matches
Mail list logo
