Jolyon,
As I mentioned I was reporting on things 7 years old, with failing
memory quite common to my age.
And I am not going to spend the time searching for it to prove you right
or wrong. Again, from memory, Intel was changing the design of the
memory manager which was going to mean that a better definition of the
null pointer would be ffffffffff... What happened with that, I do not
know or care.
As for the rest, please pretend you are hearing the stereotypical Indian
voice.
"Oh my golly gosh, thank you for clarifying that sir. I must have spent
months trying a billion solutions before I must have accidentally found
the X2."
Did it not occur to you, that it works because I knew what I was
doing.... :-) And before you retort, I do not modify the vcl for any
reason as it could lead to problems when using bpls on a clients machine
where they already exist from some other application.
Rohit
Jolyon Smith wrote:
There was no change in the “Windows standard”. It’s a simple error in
some poorly implemented error handling code added to the VCL at some
point (subsequently fixed in combo boxes, but not listboxes – as of
D2006).
You needn’t have waded through all the replies to find that the answer
was provided. The answer came very quickly… what then followed was a
great deal of pointless and diverting/misleading speculation as to
other possible explanations that disregarded the fact that the answer
was very quickly apparent from an inspection of the VCL source.
FYI - Your “multiple by 2” solution worked because it transformed a
stored value of “-1” into “-2”, which then avoided the collision
between that value (-1) and the Windows “error” code and thus avoided
the problem caused by the overly-helpful and incorrectly implemented
error handling code in the VCL.
_______________________________________________
NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi mailing list
Post: delphi@delphi.org.nz
Admin: http://delphi.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi
Unsubscribe: send an email to delphi-requ...@delphi.org.nz with Subject:
unsubscribe
