Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
On 18 July 2010 22:35, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
is: what happens if branch and trunk/another branch change the same
line/tokens of code and then those branches are merged. A good vcs comes
up with a conflict, a vcs trying to be too clever merges maybe both
lines
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Anyways, why do you want to do the same change twice? Just make it once
and merge.
In a distributed environment this is more common, like: person B
partially pulls (some commits) from person A, and person C pulls from
both A and B. Or a diamond where B and C pull
Micha Nelissen schrieb:
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Anyways, why do you want to do the same change twice? Just make it once
and merge.
In a distributed environment this is more common, like: person B
partially pulls (some commits) from person A, and person C pulls from
both A and B. Or a
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Micha Nelissen schrieb:
In a distributed environment this is more common, like: person B
partially pulls (some commits) from person A, and person C pulls from
both A and B. Or a diamond where B and C pull from A, and D pulls from B
and C.
Yes, but those are merges of
Micha Nelissen schrieb:
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Micha Nelissen schrieb:
In a distributed environment this is more common, like: person B
partially pulls (some commits) from person A, and person C pulls from
both A and B. Or a diamond where B and C pull from A, and D pulls from B
and C.
One requirement in a transformation into OOP is the replacement of all
affected procedures by methods, and of many (currently global) reference
variables by class members. When e.g. later multiple parser instances
are created, one for every unit to compile, the current compiler
directive
On 19 Jul 2010, at 01:41, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
This was told to me by Vincent and Jonas a little while back, where I
wanted to change the code in cpstrnew branch to match that of Trunk -
but without using svnmerge. Even though the code would end up being
identical, subversion raises a
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 11:21 PM, Jonas Maebe jonas.ma...@elis.ugent.bewrote:
On 11 Jul 2010, at 15:47, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
I know that the in filespec is part of the Delphi syntax, but what is
it really good for?
AFAIK it's not allowed to rename units this way, and since
On 07/19/2010 11:40 AM, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
One requirement in a transformation into OOP is the replacement of all
affected procedures by methods, and of many (currently global)
reference variables by class members. When e.g. later multiple parser
instances are created, one for every
Michael Schnell schrieb:
On 07/19/2010 11:40 AM, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
One requirement in a transformation into OOP is the replacement of all
affected procedures by methods, and of many (currently global)
reference variables by class members. When e.g. later multiple parser
instances
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
I never encountered this and doubt it :) because svn recognizes also
Then some core team members should retrain themselves with SubVersion
so they know what it can and cannot do. This will reduced them
spreading incorrect information to
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 12:29, Hans-Peter Diettrich
drdiettri...@aol.com wrote:
The directive list contains records with the name and other attributes of
every directive, and with a reference to the directive handler procedure.
These handler procedures need further information, that currently
Zitat von Hans-Peter Diettrich drdiettri...@aol.com:
[...]
These handler procedures need further information, that currently
resides in global variables. In an OO approach these variables
become class members, so that an additional reference to a concrete
object is required in the
On 19 July 2010 11:46, Jonas Maebe jonas.ma...@elis.ugent.be wrote:
That's incorrect. The problem was that while your changes were
functionally identical to the changes in trunk, they were not
syntactically identical.
See my reply to Florian. My idea was to add another commit to make it
On 07/19/2010 12:52 PM, Mattias Gärtner wrote:
About converting global variables for threads:
What are the advantages/disadvantages of using ThreadVar versus member
variables?
I don't see what you are trying to compare here.
Threadvars are addressed by a dedicated register (I suppose a
Zitat von Michael Schnell mschn...@lumino.de:
On 07/19/2010 12:52 PM, Mattias Gärtner wrote:
About converting global variables for threads:
What are the advantages/disadvantages of using ThreadVar versus
member variables?
I don't see what you are trying to compare here.
If I
On 19 Jul 2010, at 15:02, Mattias Gärtner wrote:
After a quick glance on the rtl sources it seems ThreadVar works under some
platforms internally pretty much the same as an object instance: it allocates
some memory on the heap.
That's correct. FPC has largely platform-independent support
On 07/19/2010 03:11 PM, Jonas Maebe wrote:
That's correct. FPC has largely platform-independent support for threadvars,
which is much more heavy-weight than simply using a segment register (indirect
procedure call depending on the thread manager, get thread local storage
pointer, index local
Hi,
I just updated my local fixes branch to the latest revision. r15611
and when I try and build it with my usual build scripts, it fails to
build. Trying to compile under Linux (Ubuntu 9.04) 32-bit.
Here is the compiler output.
---
...
make[7]: Entering
Op Mon, 19 Jul 2010, schreef Michael Schnell:
On 07/19/2010 03:11 PM, Jonas Maebe wrote:
That's correct. FPC has largely platform-independent support for
threadvars, which is much more heavy-weight than simply using a segment
register (indirect procedure call depending on the thread
Jonas Maebe schrieb:
There have been attempts to get the segment register approach to work
on Windows, but afaik it always crashed on at least one Windows
version.
The segment register approach is not officially documented and requires
anyways an additional code so the gain isn't that big.
On 19 July 2010 17:22, Jonas Maebe jonas.ma...@elis.ugent.be wrote:
Building svn versions is only supported when starting with the latest release
(i.e., 2.4.0 at this time). The above suggests you are starting with 2.4.1.
Ah. I assumed that because 2.4.1 is a fixes only branch, it should
Hi!
Yes, though I am still puzzled how it works on x86_64; it seems regvars
there are also accessed using fs, but x86_64 prevents you from writing
to segment registers.
As mentioned here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_64#Windows in the
10th point Windows uses the GS segment register to
Op Mon, 19 Jul 2010, schreef Sven Barth:
Hi!
Yes, though I am still puzzled how it works on x86_64; it seems regvars
there are also accessed using fs, but x86_64 prevents you from writing
to segment registers.
As mentioned here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_64#Windows in the 10th
Hi!
On 19.07.2010 18:50, Daniël Mantione wrote:
Well, the following works on i386 but doesn't on x86_64, even though
modify_ldt succeeds:
(...)
If you know how to make it work, I keep myself recommended :)
Well... according to this thread
Hello,
Regarding this bug: http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=16983
Does anyone have any ideas about what I should be looking for to fix it?
I got stuck in the stack frame between #2 and #3:
002 0x00121d20 in JERROR_ERREXIT1$J_COMMON_PTR$J_MESSAGE_CODE$LONGWORD ()
003 0x000fe9b0 in
In our previous episode, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho said:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
Hello,
Regarding this bug: http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=16983
Does anyone have any ideas about what I should be looking for to fix it?
I got stuck in the stack frame
Op Mon, 19 Jul 2010, schreef Hans-Peter Diettrich:
Michael Schnell schrieb:
I do know that gcc in Linux on X86 uses a segment register. I don't know
how gcc works in Windows, but I suppose even Windows is assumed to restore
all register values of a thread after a preemption.
Windows
This is probably a stupid question, but I'll ask anyway ;-)
Is there any support from the compiler to create arrays of, say
type ttest=(one,two,three,four);
Afair, these states could be represented with 2 bits. 00,01,10,11
So four of these items could be represented in a byte (in an array of
29 matches
Mail list logo
