How Harbour handles that? Where can I increase "default" value (if exists)
Is this harbour related or OS related?
regards, Mitja
___
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Revision: 10221
http://harbour-project.svn.sourceforge.net/harbour-project/?rev=10221&view=rev
Author: druzus
Date: 2009-02-11 01:33:31 + (Wed, 11 Feb 2009)
Log Message:
---
2009-02-11 02:38 UTC+0100 Przemyslaw Czerpak (druzus/at/priv.onet.pl)
* harbour/include/hbapi
Hi Przemek,
> 2009-02-10 10:35 UTC+0100 Viktor Szakats (harbour.01 syenar hu)
> > * source/rtl/filesys.c
> > ! Fixes for *NIX compilation to latest change.
> > Please test. [ some more ]
>
> It's not good idea to create code which depends on executable file
> location in directory tree
>
> Try using HB_OS_WIN_USED to include windows.h.
>>
>
> I put
>
> #define HB_OS_WIN_USED
>
> just before
>
> #include "clipdefs.h"
>
> and the errors went away. Is this correct?
Yes. You should put #define HB_OS_WIN_USED before any
Harbour headers. At the same time you should remove the
#includ
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009, vszak...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
Hi Viktor,
> 2009-02-10 10:35 UTC+0100 Viktor Szakats (harbour.01 syenar hu)
> * source/rtl/filesys.c
> ! Fixes for *NIX compilation to latest change.
> Please test. [ some more ]
It's not good idea to create code which depen
-Messaggio Originale-
Da: "Viktor Szakáts"
A: "Harbour Project Main Developer List."
Data invio: mercoledì 11 febbraio 2009 0.16
Oggetto: Re: [Harbour] Errors
Hi EMG,
Was this working before,
Yes.
or is this a new file?
No, it is an old file.
My guess, is you're trying to
Hi EMG,
Was this working before, or is this a new file?
My guess, is you're trying to #include clipdefs.h and windows.h
in the same file explicitly.
Try using HB_OS_WIN_USED to include windows.h.
Also see:
2009-02-04 01:09 UTC+0100 Viktor Szakats (harbour.01 syenar hu)
Brgds,
Viktor
On Tue, F
Hi Francesco,
Good question, I don't know, MSVC doesn't complain,
probably some quirk with Borland implib vs. ssleay32.dll.
This one symbol only is included without the leading
underscore in the generated ssleay32.lib.
Since the solution doesn't look trivial, unless this function
is important, I'd
I get the following errors compiling one of my modules:
Error E2238 e:\harbour\include\clipdefs.h 88: Multiple declaration for
'WORD'
Error E2344 e:\bcc55\include\windef.h 145: Earlier declaration of 'WORD'
Error E2238 e:\harbour\include\clipdefs.h 90: Multiple declaration for
'PWORD'
Error E
Hi Viktor,
with last SVN I got
J:\cvs\harbourSVN\contrib\hbssl\tests>hbmk_b32.bat test
test.c:
Error: Unresolved external '_SSL_get_read_ahead' referenced from
J:\CVS\HARBOURSVN\LIB\HBSSL.LIB|ssl
could you kindly revise ?
Tested with BCC 5.82 with last OpenSSL 0.9.8j
Best regards
Francesco
__
? d + 0.5 + 0.5
> just compare Clipper and xHarbour results.
Just for fun... VO gives 'Conversion is not possible between Date and Float'
and 'Illegal Operation' and Vulcan.net sets it to 2/10/2009 (same as
Clipper)
Paul
___
Harbour mailing l
0100
hb_ctot() could also accept all formats you wrote for t"":
hb_ctot( "01:00" )
hb_ctot( "01:58:27" )
hb_ctot( "2009-02-09" )
hb_stot() could use the strict format:
hb_stot( "20090210" )
hb_stot( "20090210183947" )
hb_stot( "
>
> > Nice, but could we avoid this strange syntax t"" ?
> > I find it rather strange in Harbour.
>
> I find t"xyz" coherent with SQL where dates and times are simply literals.
Yes, but IMO it's not a very good idea to mix different language
concepts, Harbour is rooted in Clipper, not SQL.
> So
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 7:02 PM, Viktor Szakáts wrote:
> Nice, but could we avoid this strange syntax t"" ?
> I find it rather strange in Harbour.
I find t"xyz" coherent with SQL where dates and times are simply literals.
Some examples are:
DATE'1999-12-25'
TIME'08:23:16'
TIME'14:23:16.5'
TIME
>
> hb_ctot( "2009-02-10 18:39:47 UTC+0100" ) => meaning 2009-02-10 18:39:47
>> UTC+0100
>> hb_ctot() could also accept all formats you wrote for t"":
>> hb_ctot( "01:00" )
>> hb_ctot( "01:58:27" )
>> hb_ctot( "2009-02-09" )
>>
>
> Only runtime function evaluation (without compilers pseudo-function
Miguel Angel Marchuet wrote:
Please function TTOS is necessary to fully support cdx indexes of
last version of dbf (implemented in vfp). Please don't add hb_ prefix
in this case, please don't add it.
Hi,
I'm not always a fan of HB_ prefix, but in final application it can be
solved, by:
FUNC
Hi,
hb_ctot( "2009-02-10 18:39:47 UTC+0100" ) => meaning 2009-02-10 18:39:47
UTC+0100
hb_ctot() could also accept all formats you wrote for t"":
hb_ctot( "01:00" )
hb_ctot( "01:58:27" )
hb_ctot( "2009-02-09" )
Only runtime function evaluation (without compilers pseudo-function
optimisation)
>
> Please function TTOS is necessary to fully support cdx indexes of
> last version of dbf (implemented in vfp). Please don't add hb_ prefix
> in this case, please don't add it.
You know we have a rule to add it for all Harbour extension
functions.
Depending on where TTOS() comes from, we may i
or t"":
hb_ctot( "01:00" )
hb_ctot( "01:58:27" )
hb_ctot( "2009-02-09" )
hb_stot() could use the strict format:
hb_stot( "20090210" )
hb_stot( "20090210183947" )
hb_stot( "20090210183947+0100" )
Brgds,
Viktor
___
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
Instead, I'd suggest a set of function, just like Clipper
uses for dates:
- hb_time() ->
- hb_stot( "language independent string representation of date/time" )
->
- hb_ttos() -> language independent string repr of date/time,
easy to parse with fixed positions ("MMDDHHMMSSFF")
- hb_
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote:
Hi,
> We'd need some helpers though to free users from
> computing day fractions to/from normal everyday terms
> like hours, minutes and seconds. Those fractions are
> pretty cryptic in their raw form.
> One hour is 0.041667 day.
Here support for consta
Hi Przemek,
Thanks for the heads up. I'll start with what I can find, then if you have
other exmples, I'll be in touch.
btw, You're doing a great job - wish I had 10% of the energy you do :-)
Paul
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009, Paul Tucker wrote:
Hi Paul,
> pt> I also suggested if we don't know it
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009, Paul Tucker wrote:
Hi Paul,
> pt> I also suggested if we don't know it's broke, we can't fix it...
AFAIR only few examples of problems with xHarbour HVM I sent over
two year ago has been fixed and most of them still fails. Many of them
are even registered in xHarbour bug rep
Hi Przemek,
> The .prg level timestamp arithmetic for me should be as closed as possible
> to date one. I think that the best part of xHarbour datetime implementation
> is the possibilities to easy replace existing date fields with datetime
> ones
> and that the whole code works in the same way,
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote:
> > 1) internal implementation: float point number using fractional part for
> > time representation (drawback: float point side effects, ex. today+8h+8h+8h
> > != tomorrow, feature: easy calculation), or julian date and milliseconds.
> My vote for the lat
My friends
All is well, Viktor and I cleared this up in email and he's ok with my
posting this:
===
Nope Paul, but I didn't even try very hard.
Building from source fails mainly because I no longer
maintain BISON/FLEX tools.
I've once tried some binaries, but failed for some reason I
cann
>
> 1) internal implementation: float point number using fractional part for
> time representation (drawback: float point side effects, ex. today+8h+8h+8h
> != tomorrow, feature: easy calculation), or julian date and milliseconds.
My vote for the latter (millisecs).
> 2) does we need to include
Hi Paul,
Yes, I wrote it to the Harbour list.
What on earth? Pardon?
Brgds,
Viktor
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Paul Tucker wrote:
>
>> xHarbour never built properly on my system, nor
>> could I use any binaries, so I'll skip that, but I believe you :)
>>
>>
> It looks like this quote came
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 10:16:37 -0500
"Paul Tucker" wrote:
> >xHarbour never built properly on my system, nor
> >could I use any binaries, so I'll skip that, but I believe you :)
> >
>
> It looks like this quote came from you. What on earth are yoiu talking
> about?
Sh*t, for sure ;-)
--
Andi
__
Hi,
In general I agree that introducing many different types directly
to HVM is not good idea. Especially when they are strictly bound
with some allocated resources. For such types HB_IT_POINTER seems
to be the best choice.
But I do not think that we can generalize it also for DATETIME type.
xHarbour never built properly on my system, nor
could I use any binaries, so I'll skip that, but I believe you :)
It looks like this quote came from you. What on earth are yoiu talking
about?
Paul
___
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-projec
Hi Przemek and all,
Okay, I understand the reasons and benefits, so it all
comes down how we implement it in Harbour.
I vote for adding a new type to have a clear case
rather than mixing this feature into current "D" type.
Besides creating backward compatibility problems
it would also make porting
OK, I finally found -mt switch! ;-)
Barry
Barry Jackson wrote:
It builds without errors but thread 2 never calls MainClock().
___
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
afaik gtwvg Not mix gui and cui in same screen but only in same
application but in different screen
>I did not see the xbase++ sl1 yet.
>First part is to write all classes to honor xbase parts, then
I> will see how it can be integrated with CUI.
>Regards
>Pritpal Bedi
2009/2/10 Viktor Szakáts :
Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote:
But I do not think that we can generalize it also for DATETIME type.
Just simply in current days in many database projects simple DATE fields
are replaced by DATETIME ones.
I currently have no use for them but when I have done some tests with
moving from dbfs to some
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote:
Hi Viktor,
> Sorry to jump it but I fail to see why should we rush a new proprietary type
> into the core, while it has a
> proper 3rd party solution.
> There could be lots of other types introduced into
> core by this reasoning.
In general I agree that
>
> mix traditional SAY/GET or TBrowse() with Graphical User Interface
> elements (like xbase++ 1.9 sl1 at
> http://www.alaska-software.com/products/xpp/feature-overview-v19sl1.pdf)
Isn't it the goal of GTWVG?
Brgds,
Viktor
___
Harbour mailing list
Har
>Pls read this entry (and preceding e-mails on the list):2009-02-06 23:47
>UTC+0100 Viktor Szakats
Hi Viktor,
Thanks again. I completely forgot that change :(
Best regards,
Toninho.
__
Faça ligações para outros computadores com o novo Yahoo! Mes
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Massimo Belgrano wrote:
> One cent for my dream list:
> Unification of make system by hbmk.prg
> Capability of gtwvt,gtwvg of running on little virtual screen either
> absolute,relative x,y coordinate (window mobile device with old code)
hbmk.prg can be added an
Unification of make system by hbmk.prg
Capability of gtwvt,gtwvg of running on little virtual screen either
absolute,relative coordinate (window mobile device with old code)
mix traditional SAY/GET or TBrowse() with Graphical User Interface
elements (like xbase++ 1.9 sl1 at
http://www.alaska-softwa
One cent for my dream list:
Unification of make system by hbmk.prg
Capability of gtwvt,gtwvg of running on little virtual screen either
absolute,relative x,y coordinate (window mobile device with old code)
2009/2/10 Viktor Szakáts :
> Hi everyone,
> Who has what pending items (fixes, new developm
Pls read this entry (and preceding e-mails on the list):2009-02-06 23:47
UTC+0100 Viktor Szakats
Brgds,
Viktor
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 12:54 PM, toni...@fwi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After latest SVN changes hashes can´t be assigned with ":", same
> compiling Harbour with -DHB_HASH_MSG_ITEMS.
>
> SET C_U
Hi,
After latest SVN changes hashes can´t be assigned with ":", same
compiling Harbour with -DHB_HASH_MSG_ITEMS.
SET C_USR=-DHB_GUI -DHB_FM_STATISTICS_OFF -DHB_NO_PROFILER
-DADS_LIB_VERSION=700 -DHB_HASH_MSG_ITEMS -DHB_NO_DEBUG
-DHB_LEGACY_OFF
Thanks and best regards,
Toninho.
___
>Hi Toninho,
>Yes, I've seen it. Even installed the tool.
>
>I just can guess that dlmalloc won't explictly deal with
>releasing its whole pool (which may include preallocated
>areas) while the app is running, and instead leaves that
>for the OS when quitting the app. Maybe similar is happening
>wi
Hi Toninho,
Yes, I've seen it. Even installed the tool.
I just can guess that dlmalloc won't explictly deal with
releasing its whole pool (which may include preallocated
areas) while the app is running, and instead leaves that
for the OS when quitting the app. Maybe similar is happening
with GTs/F
>Hi everyone,
>Who has what pending items (fixes, new development, TODOs)
>before the 1.1 release?
Hi Viktor, I have a lot of windows unfreed resources here. I don´t
know if this is a problem that need be fixed before the 1.1 release,
or if this issue is a real problem, but it exist.
this is my p
>Log Message:
>---
>2009-02-10 10:35 UTC+0100 Viktor Szakats (harbour.01 syenar hu)
> * source/rtl/filesys.c
>! Fixes for *NIX compilation to latest change.
> Please test. [ some more ]
>
Viktor, compile was successful.
Thank you
___
Revision: 10220
http://harbour-project.svn.sourceforge.net/harbour-project/?rev=10220&view=rev
Author: vszakats
Date: 2009-02-10 09:36:36 + (Tue, 10 Feb 2009)
Log Message:
---
2009-02-10 10:35 UTC+0100 Viktor Szakats (harbour.01 syenar hu)
* source/rtl/filesys.c
Revision: 10219
http://harbour-project.svn.sourceforge.net/harbour-project/?rev=10219&view=rev
Author: vszakats
Date: 2009-02-10 09:34:44 + (Tue, 10 Feb 2009)
Log Message:
---
2009-02-10 10:34 UTC+0100 Viktor Szakats (harbour.01 syenar hu)
* source/rtl/filesys.c
Hi Pritpal,
> What you mean by "proven" ? For the last few years
> my applns are in production with GTWVG.
> BTW, a simple Xbase++ program has been submitted
> to Harbour and it ran flawless just with few changes.
> If anybody is interested to look into that code, speak up.
For me it does only
Thanks for your useful suggestion
my suggestion is add sample in changelog (or reference where is the
sample) because sample explain better that word
A newbies harbour's user must
search in changelog
read harbour/source/rdd/hsx/hsx.c header file
search in mailing list where the mechanism was disc
Today compiling from sources...
make[3]: Entering directory
`/usr/src/harbour/harbour/source/rtl/linux/gcc'
gcc -I. -I../../../../include -Wall -W -O3 -c ../../filesys.c -ofilesys.o
../../filesys.c: In function hb_fsBaseDirBuff:
../../filesys.c:3242: error: invalid operands to binary + (have
52 matches
Mail list logo
