Ok I got this almost done (mirroring is great I didn't know I could do that)
and did the rebase which shows the linear history now.
First a question, do I need to do the "rebase main" again before I push to
remote or does it stay this way now?
Problem is I go to push the changes to the my remo
> On Jan 19, 2022, at 8:14 PM, Ryan Joseph wrote:
>
> Ok I got this almost done (mirroring is great I didn't know I could do that)
> and did the rebase which shows the linear history now.
>
> First a question, do I need to do the "rebase main" again before I push to
> remote or does it stay
> On Jan 20, 2022, at 9:11 AM, Ryan Joseph wrote:
>
> The problem was my remote for the branch got lost after rebasing but I think
> I fixed it by re-pulling.
>
> It looks like some unrelated commits are included in my merge request but
> maybe that happened because I rebased the repo after
> On Jan 20, 2022, at 8:10 PM, Ryan Joseph wrote:
>
> I just check at https://gitlab.com/freepascal.org/fpc/source/-/merge_requests
> and I don't see my merge request appeared. If it were GitHub I would expect
> to see it there. What did I do wrong?
So what I did was created a merge request
I have this macro:
{$define TCallback := TCallback2}
which gives a long list of these errors.
warning: Expanding of macros exceeds a depth of 16.
What does this warning mean and how can I resolve it?
Regards,
Ryan Joseph
___
fpc-pascal maill
> On Jan 27, 2022, at 12:10 AM, Pierre Muller via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> You should probably try to look for another define somewhere else!
Thanks I found it. The error was misleading as it directed me the first
occurrence when it was the second one that did it. I think using undef would
I thought I had this working some years ago but I'm confused again. :)
When trying to use SDL on iPhone I include:
{$PASCALMAINNAME SDL_main}
But when I compile I get a linker error:
Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:
"_main", referenced from:
implicit entry/start for main execu
> On Feb 1, 2022, at 3:15 AM, Jonas Maebe via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> It only works in your main program, not in a unit or so. Maybe that's the
> reason?
The linker wants me to redefine "main" to clear the error but this doesn't make
sense and the app crashes when launched. I.e.:
function
> On Feb 1, 2022, at 9:34 AM, Ryan Joseph wrote:
>
> My only guess is that the linker can't find the SDL main function in the
> framework, even though everything else links properly.
If anyone understands SDL I figured out how to get around this missing main
linker error and program runs but
> On Feb 1, 2022, at 9:22 PM, Ryan Joseph wrote:
>
>
> If anyone understands SDL I figured out how to get around this missing main
> linker error and program runs but then crashes. I've reported to SDL at
> https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/crash-in-uitextfield/34711 (along with my
> program i
> On Feb 12, 2022, at 11:40 PM, Jonas Maebe via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> I wouldn't consider this to be working by design, but rather because of
> implementation limitations.
I agree and it should be fixed probably.
Regards,
Ryan Joseph
__
This has been a constant problem for me with FPC and wanted to make a formal
post with code examples since I've only mentioned it in passing before.
How can it be achieved to have a caller agnostic procedure variables? I've
tried making some big crazy dispatch record that uses generics but becau
> On Feb 15, 2022, at 2:09 PM, Michael Van Canneyt via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> I've answered this question before:
>
> The "Reference to procedure" that will be part of anonymous functionswill do
> this for you.
I'm sorry I forgot! This thing keeps coming up for me and driving me nuts but I
> On Feb 15, 2022, at 3:32 PM, Michael Van Canneyt via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> I requested that this:
>
> procedure TMyObject.Demo;
>
> Procedure DoSub;
> begin
>Writeln('Sub');
> end;
>
> begin
> DoTest(DoSub);
> end;
So that means "reference to procedure" is not compatible with "
> On Feb 15, 2022, at 5:15 PM, Sven Barth wrote:
>
> It contains a capture object that backs the method.
> If nothing is captured and the right hand side is a direct function or method
> pointer then the compiler could in principle create something that is
> essentially static to avoid alloc
> On Feb 15, 2022, at 7:10 PM, Michael Van Canneyt
> wrote:
>
> In Delphi it is not. In FPC it should be :-)
Indeed should be but that's what I'm trying to figure out with how this is
implemented.
Why wouldn't Delphi be able to do this I wonder. The calling mechanism in this
object is not
> On Feb 15, 2022, at 8:32 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> A function reference is simply an interface of which the Invoke method can be
> called on the instance instead of manually doing "Foo.Invoke".
>
> The real "magic" is when the compiler generates the *implementation* of sai
> On Feb 15, 2022, at 8:26 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> It's relatively "easy" to implement assigning a nested function to function
> references. However assigning a nested function variable to a function
> reference is much harder.
> Assigning a function reference to a nested
> On Feb 16, 2022, at 2:46 AM, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> // nested function/procedure/routine variable
> type
> TFoobarNested = function: LongInt is nested;
>
> var
>f: TFoobarFuncRef;
> begin
> // anonymous function/procedure/routine
> f := function: LongInt
>
> On Feb 15, 2022, at 11:09 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> For a global function the compiler has to generate a wrapper that gets rid of
> the Self parameter of the interface.
>
The compiler generates this interface at compile time right? And then when the
scope of the calling
> On Feb 16, 2022, at 12:18 AM, Thomas Kurz via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> What release are anonymous functions planed for? FPC 3.4.0?
They aren't even in trunk yet. Could be months or years.
Regards,
Ryan Joseph
___
fpc-pascal maillist - f
I tried to use the bit helpers like
https://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/rtl/sysutils/twordhelper.testbit.html but
the bit to test is 0..15. I expected this to work like
https://wiki.freepascal.org/Bit_manipulation but that doesn't seem to be the
case.
Does there exist bit helpers like GetBi
> On Feb 21, 2022, at 7:01 PM, Michael Van Canneyt via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> Yes, this is testbit.
>
> Why do you say it does not work ?
Oh my, I was confusing my terms I think. I wanted to do bit masking (I think
it's called). I was expecting there to be something like TestFlag in the RT
> On Feb 21, 2022, at 7:31 PM, Michael Van Canneyt via fpc-pascal
> wrote:
>
> Hm. I'm not sure that this code does what you need.
>
> But masking is indeed not in the helpers.
>
Try it yourself, it does indeed work. How else are you supposed to test these
kinds of bit flag APIs where all
401 - 424 of 424 matches
Mail list logo
