From: L D Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: Secret society to end secret societies
To: Peter Vreman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal]More strangeness...
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTE
Marco van de Voort wrote:
...
> Does somebody know something more about Winapi errorhandling?
...
It works the same way as under libc but instead checking ErrNo you check GetLastError.
Expressing it as clearly as I can: For each WinPAI call you should check the WinAPI
documentation (as with ev
In reply to your message of August 30, 2003
> Something else. But I think you are on the wrong track with HWND.
This is a possibility I've considered. It might be something else entirely...
but it is definately something related to my program...
Another possibility, and one I've tested for, is
In reply to your message of August 30, 2003
> We can discuss principles for hours of course, but that doesn't help you.
> Did you try to change the HWND type from longint to DWORD or Cardinal
> (which is the same) in the windows unit ? If so, does it help ?
I re-declared Hwind to be a longword in
> In reply to your message of August 29, 2003
>
> > And it has been already a longint for 5 years.
>
> Which pre-dates all of NT4, win2000, XP, 2003 ... Which are true 32 bit
> operating systems.
NT4 is older, I run 2000 and before that its beta's on my work space for 24
hours/a week since earl
> In reply to your message of August 29, 2003
>
> > Yes I think about it. Typed negative on this side (the pascal side). On
> > 2-complements it is the same binary layout, only the interpretation is
> > different. The win32 API sees no difference, since it puts its own typing
> > over it.
>
> No
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, L D Blake wrote:
> In reply to your message of August 29, 2003
> > Yes I think about it. Typed negative on this side (the pascal side). On
> > 2-complements it is the same binary layout, only the interpretation is
> > different. The win32 API sees no difference, since it pu
In reply to your message of August 29, 2003
> Yes I think about it. Typed negative on this side (the pascal side). On
> 2-complements it is the same binary layout, only the interpretation is
> different. The win32 API sees no difference, since it puts its own typing
> over it.
Not to be sarcasti
In reply to your message of August 29, 2003
> And it has been already a longint for 5 years.
Which pre-dates all of NT4, win2000, XP, 2003 ... Which are true 32 bit
operating systems.
I can't help wondering if the handle is somehow being changed by the type
mismatch giving rise to duplicate han
In reply to your message of August 29, 2003
> Yes I think about it. Typed negative on this side (the pascal side). On
> 2-complements it is the same binary layout, only the interpretation is
> different. The win32 API sees no difference, since it puts its own typing
> over it.
Turn on Pascal's ra
> In reply to your message of August 29, 2003
>
> >> Peter, longint is simply wrong.
>
> > Is it?
>
> Yeah totally wrong... A negative handle??? Think about it...
Yes I think about it. Typed negative on this side (the pascal side). On
2-complements it is the same binary layout, only the inter
In reply to your message of August 29, 2003
>> Peter, longint is simply wrong.
> Is it?
Yeah totally wrong... A negative handle??? Think about it...
> Moreover, I agree with Peter, HWND's are used really a lot. Inside FPC,
> ICS, Lazarus etc etc.
Yep, well here's the rub... I took an older
In reply to your message of August 29, 2003
> Peter, longint is simply wrong. whist is may work in most circumstances, if
> you are on a system with a lot of handles being allocated, you will get to
> the realms on 32bit unsigned values. As the normal test for a handle
> allocation is :
There's a
In reply to your message of August 29, 2003
> In the development branch THandle is a Cardinal. In the stable 1.0.x
> branch we left it an Longint. In the past there were some issues in the
> with Cardinal. At that moment it was decided to leave thandle at longint.
> And it has been already a longi
In reply to your message of August 29, 2003
> It could be the handle which is passed on the lost focus event.
That's what I'm thinking... a handle passed in LParam, which is defined as a
longint in the windows unit and thus in my code, causing a range checking error.
I've been looking further at
> > with Cardinal. At that moment it was decided to leave thandle at longint.
> > And it has been already a longint for 5 years. When it was really a
> > problem then it would have been noticed much earlier.
>
> Peter, longint is simply wrong.
Is it? FPC 1.0.x is at D2..D4 level, and some of th
> In the development branch THandle is a Cardinal. In the stable 1.0.x
> branch we left it an Longint. In the past there were some issues in the
> with Cardinal. At that moment it was decided to leave thandle at longint.
> And it has been already a longint for 5 years. When it was really a
> proble
>
>> Yep, I took a look at the windows unit last night, found the bulk of
>> type
>> declarations were in BASE.INC and noticed, almost right away, that
> "Handle" a
>> 32 bit unsigned value is declared as a longint. Shouldn't it be a
> LongWord? A
>> longint has only half as many positive values as
> Yep, I took a look at the windows unit last night, found the bulk of type
> declarations were in BASE.INC and noticed, almost right away, that
"Handle" a
> 32 bit unsigned value is declared as a longint. Shouldn't it be a
LongWord? A
> longint has only half as many positive values as a longword
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, L D Blake wrote:
> In reply to your message of August 29, 2003
> > Do you catch the 'focus lost' event ? Do you have any assembler ?
> > Windows expects some registers to be saved.
>
> No and no. But come to think of it that's about when the problem is occuring.
It could b
In reply to your message of August 29, 2003
> Do you catch the 'focus lost' event ? Do you have any assembler ?
> Windows expects some registers to be saved.
No and no. But come to think of it that's about when the problem is occuring.
> Are the winproc routines declared as stdcall ?
Yes.
>
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, L D Blake wrote:
> In reply to your message of August 28, 2003
>
> > On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, L D Blake wrote:
>
> >> Why is it that if I compile an FPC program with range checking turned on,
> >> opening any HTML file in ie immediately causes "Error 201" from my FPC program?
>
In reply to your message of August 28, 2003
> On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, L D Blake wrote:
>> Why is it that if I compile an FPC program with range checking turned on,
>> opening any HTML file in ie immediately causes "Error 201" from my FPC program?
> Ahem.
> A litlle bit more information may be in or
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, L D Blake wrote:
> Why is it that if I compile an FPC program with range checking turned on,
> opening any HTML file in ie immediately causes "Error 201" from my FPC program?
Ahem.
A litlle bit more information may be in order here ?
What kind of program is this ? What unit
Why is it that if I compile an FPC program with range checking turned on,
opening any HTML file in ie immediately causes "Error 201" from my FPC program?
---
L D Blake
___
fpc-pascal maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/li
25 matches
Mail list logo
