Martin Schreiber wrote:
Copy the modified definition in type section of your program file:
...
Yes, it works!
Which means that if you put in your own type definitions, they will
simply overrule the system definitions.
I wasn't aware of that trick.
So I can do with that until a corre
On Sunday 08 January 2006 15.43, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
> Now, I'm not familiar with the development of the PFC,
> where and when can I download the corrected version of 2.0.2?
Copy the modified definition in type section of your program file:
Program test;
// Program for testing dialogue boxes
On 08 Jan 2006, at 15:43, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
Now, I'm not familiar with the development of the PFC,
where and when can I download the corrected version of 2.0.2?
You can't, Martin Schreiber compiled his own corrected version.
Jonas___
fpc-pasc
Martin Schreiber wrote:
Your testcase worked for me with FPC 2.0.2 and the modified DLGTEMPLATE and
DLGITEMTEMPLATE.
Yes, I'm convinced that the problem lies where you have pointed it out.
I have let my test program show sizeof(DLGTEMPLATE) and the output from
the version compiled with 2.0
Jonas Maebe wrote:
Can you check the date of the compiler with "fpc -iD"? As far as I
know no new snapshot was built last night because of errors compiling
the graph unit.
Right. Even though the zip file date is more recent, the "fpc -D" returns:
2005/12/29
Hans Mårtensson
On Saturday 07 January 2006 18.43, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
> I have downloaded the 2.1.1 snapshot and compiled my testprogram with
> it, and the problem is still there: no dialog box showes up.
>
Your testcase worked for me with FPC 2.0.2 and the modified DLGTEMPLATE and
DLGITEMTEMPLATE.
> Then,
On 07 Jan 2006, at 18:43, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
I have downloaded the 2.1.1 snapshot and compiled my testprogram
with it, and the problem is still there: no dialog box showes up.
Can you check the date of the compiler with "fpc -iD"? As far as I
know no new snapshot was built last night b
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 06 Jan 2006, at 19:12, Martin Schreiber wrote:
The problem is in rtl/win32/wininc/struct.inc, the smallint's were
integer's:
Thanks, I've committed your changes. If someone can verifies it works
in 2.1.1 tomorrow, I'll merge it back to 2.0.3 as well.
I have dow
On 06 Jan 2006, at 19:12, Martin Schreiber wrote:
I hope someone else can take it over from here, because I don't have
Windows (or even a computer which can run Windows).
The problem is in rtl/win32/wininc/struct.inc, the smallint's were
integer's:
Thanks, I've committed your changes. If
On Friday 06 January 2006 12.32, Jonas Maebe wrote:
> I hope someone else can take it over from here, because I don't have
> Windows (or even a computer which can run Windows).
The problem is in rtl/win32/wininc/struct.inc, the smallint's were integer's:
DLGTEMPLATE = packed record //from rtl
On 06 Jan 2006, at 15:37, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
OK, thank you for your help so far.
I will try to do further experiments in order to locate the problem.
I think it must be in the data structure that defines the dialog
box, which the two compiler versions generate differently.
You can try w
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 04 Jan 2006, at 23:46, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
When I compile this source code with FPC 1.0.10, it produces a
program that makes a window with one menu item. When you click on
it, a dialogue box pops up.
But when I compile the same source code with FPC 2.0.2, I still
On 04 Jan 2006, at 23:46, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
When I compile this source code with FPC 1.0.10, it produces a
program that makes a window with one menu item. When you click on
it, a dialogue box pops up.
But when I compile the same source code with FPC 2.0.2, I still get
a program that
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 04 Jan 2006, at 21:51, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
The type of pBoxtemplate is ^word.
Is it not true that
(dword(pBoxtemplate) and 1)=1
evaluates to TRUE, if and only if pBoxtemplate is NOT aligned to a
word boundary (16 bit boundary)?
And then, assuming pBoxtemplate is
On 04 Jan 2006, at 21:51, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
Does PPC 2.0.2 handle alignment of data the same way as former
versions?
The statements below have nothing to do with alignment.
The type of pBoxtemplate is ^word.
Is it not true that
(dword(pBoxtemplate) and 1)=1
evaluates to TRUE, if and
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 04 Jan 2006, at 17:51, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
Does PPC 2.0.2 handle alignment of data the same way as former
versions?
The statements below have nothing to do with alignment.
Will the statements (the conditions)
if (dword(pBoxtemplate) and 1)=1 then pBoxtemplate:=
On 04 Jan 2006, at 17:51, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
Does PPC 2.0.2 handle alignment of data the same way as former
versions?
The statements below have nothing to do with alignment.
Will the statements (the conditions)
if (dword(pBoxtemplate) and 1)=1 then pBoxtemplate:=nil;
I can only thin
Hans Mĺrtensson wrote:
.
.
> Does PPC 2.0.2 handle alignment of data the same way as former versions?
.
.
Actually, I don't think so - I believe the default alignment might have
changed from 2 to 4 (at least this seems to be indicated by my simple
test). You can check this easily for pBoxtempl
Jonas Maebe wrote:
They should be.
Thank you for your careful answer. I will return later if I am able
to make a simple sample program that can reproduce the problem.
(Or may be I should stick to 1.0.10 that worked for me)
It would be nice if you could provide the sample program (and subm
On 03 Jan 2006, at 19:57, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
So I tried:
if DialogBoxIndirect(0, pBox2, Window, Box2Proc) = 0 then exit;
And the compiler assessed that the number of parameters was wrong.
But this is an error in message, because the number of
parameters is right.
It was probably compla
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 28 Dec 2005, at 23:49, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
The problem was the following program line, using the windows unit:
if DialogBoxIndirect(0, pBox2, Window, @Box2Proc) = 0 then exit;
The compiler assessed an error in parameter 4. Should not be an
address, but a variable.
On 28 Dec 2005, at 23:49, Hans Mårtensson wrote:
The problem was the following program line, using the windows unit:
if DialogBoxIndirect(0, pBox2, Window, @Box2Proc) = 0 then exit;
The compiler assessed an error in parameter 4. Should not be an
address, but a variable.
Is your Box2Proc pro
22 matches
Mail list logo
