the announcement on the OSv list:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/osv-dev/4KWShVlt08s
An excellent wiki article has been written back in september 2016 about
FreePascal on OSv
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Free_Pascal_on_OSv#Install_OSv_on_Linux
but at this time there were limited su
On 30.05.2018 22:27, Darius Blaszyk wrote:
For a hard real-time project I am considering using freepascal.
Hard realtime does non mean "fast" but "definable guarantied timing
behavior".
FPC is not less for this, than any other language that does not depend
on garbage collection, any "standard
Il 04/06/2018 14:06, Martin Wynne ha scritto:
uses Unit1;
procedure TForm2.FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
begin
Parent:=Form1;
Anchors:=[];
Visible:=True;
end;
4. run it, and the debugger will show the error message.
Just remove the two lines
Parent:= Form1; (which is wrong, because it
> On Jun 4, 2018, at 9:12 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
> wrote:
>
> All the rest of what you do remains exactly the same. Dynamic arrays do far
> less than what you seem to assume.
As noted the inclocked()/declocked() calls destroyed some performance sensitive
parts of my code while testing and I
> On Jun 4, 2018, at 9:21 PM, Martin Schreiber wrote:
>
> It seems that the inclocked()/declocked() operations completely destroy the
> performance of the OP's application (which I find strange) so he never want
> to touch dynamic arrays anymore as he wrote.
It was one hyper sensitive part o
On Monday 04 June 2018 16:12:27 Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>
> They make life easier by reducing the need for manual memory
> management. No more, no less. Other than that they behave like normal
> arrays on the heap.
>
It seems that the inclocked()/declocked() operations completely destroy the
pe
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Ryan Joseph wrote:
On Jun 4, 2018, at 5:46 PM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
Well, as far as I can see, you are repeating what the compiler already does for
you out of the box.
But it’s customizable, that’s the point. What happens when you remove an
element from a dyn
> On Jun 4, 2018, at 5:46 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
> wrote:
>
> Well, as far as I can see, you are repeating what the compiler already does
> for you out of the box.
But it’s customizable, that’s the point. What happens when you remove an
element from a dynamic array? I don’t even know where
Hi Mattias,
Thanks for your reply.
'TWinControl.WMSize loop detected, the widgetset does not like the LCL
bounds or sends unneeded wmsize messages'.
Can you create a bug report with an example to reproduce the loop?
Sorry, I don't know how to do that. However, it is very easy to replicate:
>> It would be reasonable to assume that the predefined + might be
>> substantially more efficient than a programmer-defined one could be.
>Yes, that's one of the reasons I vote for keeping the new feature
>and allow to overload the operator.
I don't think that argument holds water. Concatenatio
> On Jun 4, 2018, at 4:39 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
> wrote:
>
> The array is private. This means that the reference count will be 0 or 1.
I looked at the examples on the wiki and think by private you mean that the ref
count does indeed need to be a pointer so it gets updated for all reference
On Sun, 3 Jun 2018 13:06:59 +0100
Martin Wynne wrote:
> If I create a child form by setting Parent:=other_form; in FormCreate,
> it cannot be dragged to a new position by the user.
Correct. Setting aForm.Parent makes the form a "normal" control like a
frame or panel. If you want dragging, you n
This appears to be a topic for the Lazarus list, as it appears that
you're using the Lazarus LCL: laza...@lists.lazarus-ide.org
There you may obtain adequate assistance.
Giuliano
Thanks. Sorry for posting to the wrong list.
Martin.
___
fpc-pascal
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Ryan Joseph wrote:
On Jun 4, 2018, at 4:39 PM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
I fail to see why you need management operators for this.
just because I wanted the array implementation available and to get automatic
cleanup. I don’t know all the stuff dynamic arrays do be
> On Jun 4, 2018, at 4:39 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
> wrote:
>
> I fail to see why you need management operators for this.
just because I wanted the array implementation available and to get automatic
cleanup. I don’t know all the stuff dynamic arrays do behind the scenes and
that worries me
Il 03/06/2018 14:06, Martin Wynne ha scritto:
I'm porting a project to Lazarus from Delphi5, where it works fine.
Child forms can be dragged around even with the top and left anchors set.
Thanks for any help in fixing this
This appears to be a topic for the Lazarus list, as it appears that
y
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Ryan Joseph wrote:
Since we were talking about dynamic arrays I was curious to see if they could
be implemented using the new management operators so I made a little proof of
concept by cobbling together old code. It’s not complete or very good by any
means but I think i
Since we were talking about dynamic arrays I was curious to see if they could
be implemented using the new management operators so I made a little proof of
concept by cobbling together old code. It’s not complete or very good by any
means but I think it’s a pretty interesting alternative to usin
18 matches
Mail list logo
