On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 18:50:12 +0200
Marc Weustink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:13:35 +0200 (Romance Daylight Time)
> > Michael Van Canneyt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >>On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>I don't know, why the Screen forms must have separate names, but
> >>>>>nevertheless: implemented.
> >>>>
> >>>>Separate names ????
> >>>
> >>>Sorry. I meant unique names.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>All created froms are "registered" with the screen object, so it knows
> >>>>all forms and thus all names.
> >>>
> >>>True.
> >>>Is there any reason, why all forms must have unique names?
> >>
> >>No.
> >>Only if they are owned by the same owner. So if all forms are owned by
> >>Application, they must have different names. This is also true in
> >>Delphi, it is a TComponent thing.
> >
> >
> > Hey, wait a minute. That was my point. ;)
> > By checking the Screen all forms, independent of their Owner have unique
> > names. So, it has nothing to do with TComponent.
> > BTW: forms can have any owner and in the given example a form was the
> > owner of two other forms.
>
> Indeed and that didn't work with your first solution. I guess therefore
> borland checkes against Screen.Forms (and only during loading at runtime)
Do you mean, it's only a hack?
I would have expected, the global uniqueness is because Form names can be
used for IPC (COM/RPC/...).
Mattias
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
