On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 4:53 AM, Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd
wrote:
>> But my suggestion has absolutely *nothing* to do with enabling ICS
>> users to magically be able able to use ICS with future versions of
>> Delphi.
>
> Wrong, that is exactly what you said in the root message, that ver
Hello all !
I've followed the discussion from the start.
In my opinion, it is not worth getting upset with that matter.
--
francois.pie...@overbyte.be
http://www.overbyte.be
--
To unsubscribe or change your settings for TWSocket mailing list
please goto http://lists.elists.org/cgi-bin/mailman
In addition to previous message: Jon's suggestion with {$IF CompilerVersion >=
##} looks pretty, and if the only thing preventing from using it is a new
compiler versions, it could be easily solved by this code:
{$IF CompilerVersion > LastKnownAndTestedCompilerVersion}
Error ( Sorry, I don't k
As for me, I counted current compilers.inc code not-optimal too so I redesigned
it. Haven't tested it with .Net or Linux (these targets use quite different
approach) but Windows versions seem working OK.
Here's my version:
// Compiler defines not specific to a particlular platform.
// BDS 201
> But my suggestion has absolutely *nothing* to do with enabling ICS
> users to magically be able able to use ICS with future versions of
> Delphi.
Wrong, that is exactly what you said in the root message, that version
checks should be ignored for unknown new compilers.
> So, when compiling thi
Please, please stop assuming that I'm trying to achieve some kind of
magical "hey, it works!" trick out of a magician's hat.
I already replied to DZ-Jay's concern about "automatically supporting
new versions". Just as there is a lowest version check, there can be
a highest version check too.
If
> My suggestion is largely based on a goal that I set for myself
> during the time that Delphi XE was being developed. The current
> overhead in maintaining the include file seems excessive, at best.
It takes maybe 30 seconds to add a new version of Delphi to the include
file, another minute to
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 2:02 AM, Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd
wrote:
> Using old components on newer Delphi releases is always risky, and
> totally unnecessary with ICS since the XE version was available on the
> day of release of XE on both the ICS web site, CodeCentral and the
> companio
> If nothing else:
> If no VER defines are detected, then assume the latest. Which, in
> this particular case, would be VER210.
Impossible, new Delphi releases are often breaking, it took months of
effort to support Delphi 2009 and even Delphi XE needed changes in ICS.
Using old components on
My apologies for the continued rant, but I had another thought to share. ;)
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 2:31 PM, DZ-Jay wrote:
> Since a new compiler is an absolute unknown factor, it cannot be assumed to
> be supported by default.
If the only objection to using CompilerVersion is to avoid implying
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Olivier Sannier wrote:
> Yeah, that's the problem I have. Maybe it's humor for the "compile then
> ship" part,
It was humor. I was trying to make the point that just because
something compiles does not mean it is ready to ship. I never meant
to imply that adding
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 2:31 PM, DZ-Jay wrote:
>
> It can never be known in advance what new features will be added or which old
> features may be deprecated by a new version of a compiler; and whether any of
> it will break existing code or not.
Of course not.
> ICS, like many other components
On 05/09/2010 23:22, Jon Robertson wrote:
But then again, you must know what you are talking about...
Wow. I'm surprised by the hostility.
Sorry, bad day, you're the last one on the long list of weird remarks to
day...
Based on your JVCL experience, are you aware of anything that should
be
> But then again, you must know what you are talking about...
Wow. I'm surprised by the hostility.
Based on your JVCL experience, are you aware of anything that should
be reviewed in ICS for XE support?
Isn't JVCL is a little more dependent on the core VCL components than
ICS is? For the most
On Sep 05, 2010, at 15:06, Jon Robertson wrote:
> If ICS works in D2010, why can't the same source be recompiled in
> Delphi XE without change? Why must component vendors insist on
> forcing source code changes (even if just the .inc file) for every
> version, when there is very likely nothing i
On 05/09/2010 21:06, Jon Robertson wrote:
If ICS works in D2010, why can't the same source be recompiled in
Delphi XE without change? Why must component vendors insist on
forcing source code changes (even if just the .inc file) for every
version, when there is very likely nothing in the new ver
> Which problem do you have exactly ?
> I never had any complain about Delphi version detection.
If nothing else:
If no VER defines are detected, then assume the latest. Which, in
this particular case, would be VER210.
Even better:
Use {$IF CompilerVersion >= } conditionals to determine Delphi
If ICS works in D2010, why can't the same source be recompiled in
Delphi XE without change? Why must component vendors insist on
forcing source code changes (even if just the .inc file) for every
version, when there is very likely nothing in the new version of
Delphi that will break the components
So, while installing my copy of ICS (currently used in D2009 and
D2010) in Delphi XE, the compile dies on:
{$IFNDEF COMPILER7_UP}
Bomb('This component requires Delphi 7 or later');
{$ENDIF}
Why can't component vendors use more reliable means of detecting
versions of Delphi?
Which problem d
So, while installing my copy of ICS (currently used in D2009 and
D2010) in Delphi XE, the compile dies on:
{$IFNDEF COMPILER7_UP}
Bomb('This component requires Delphi 7 or later');
{$ENDIF}
Which reminds me of one of my pet peeves regarding third-party
components and Delphi upgrades:
Why can'
20 matches
Mail list logo
