Michael Van Canneyt het geskryf:
I don't understand why you have so many problems. I did a standard ubuntu
install, installed all of latex (there is a metapackage), and the docs
compiled without a single glitch.
I couldn't find any 'latex' metapackage. Anyway, I google'd the issue
which I
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Michael Van Canneyt het geskryf:
I don't understand why you have so many problems. I did a standard ubuntu
install, installed all of latex (there is a metapackage), and the docs
compiled without a single glitch.
I couldn't find any 'latex'
Fixed, thanks for reporting.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Hi,
Can someone explain why in mode objfpc comparing methods only compares
the address, but not the instance?
For example:
a:=TMyClass.Create;
b:=TMyClass.Create;
if @a.test = @b.test then writeln('the same method');
This results in strange behaviors, when using the following code
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Can someone explain why in mode objfpc comparing methods only compares
the address, but not the instance?
Seems perfectly logical to me (@ = Address of, in this case code
address, the code is the same for all instances of a class).
-Michael
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Hi,
Can someone explain why in mode objfpc comparing methods only compares
the address, but not the instance?
For example:
a:=TMyClass.Create;
b:=TMyClass.Create;
if @a.test = @b.test then writeln('the same method');
This results in strange behaviors, when using
Zitat von Michael Schnell mschn...@lumino.de:
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Can someone explain why in mode objfpc comparing methods only compares
the address, but not the instance?
Seems perfectly logical to me (@ = Address of, in this case code
address, the code is the same for all instances of a
On 10 Sep 2009, at 14:01, Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Can someone explain why in mode objfpc comparing methods only
compares
the address, but not the instance?
Seems perfectly logical to me (@ = Address of, in this case code
address, the code is the same for all
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Zitat von Michael Schnell mschn...@lumino.de:
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Can someone explain why in mode objfpc comparing methods only compares
the address, but not the instance?
Seems perfectly logical to me (@ = Address of, in this case code
address, the code is the
Jonas Maebe schreef:
On 10 Sep 2009, at 14:01, Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Can someone explain why in mode objfpc comparing methods only compares
the address, but not the instance?
Seems perfectly logical to me (@ = Address of, in this case code
address, the code is the
Hi,
I downloaded a while back the FPC 2.2.0 and 2.2.4 documentation in PDF
and PS format. In both cases the chart.* files were incorrect (I believe).
The filename implies a chart, so I gathered that it is a class chart /
hierarchy of some kind. But when I view it, it is just a listing of the
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Hi,
I downloaded a while back the FPC 2.2.0 and 2.2.4 documentation in PDF
and PS format. In both cases the chart.* files were incorrect (I believe).
The filename implies a chart, so I gathered that it is a class chart /
hierarchy of some kind.
Michael Van Canneyt het geskryf:
If you have a suggestion, I'll be glad to change the name.
So the name and content is correct? Umm, so how did you get to the name
chart? :-) When I opened that file, I expected the class hierarchy
chart - you know, like the one Borland gave with D7 K3.
Umm,
Graeme Geldenhuys schreef:
Michael Van Canneyt het geskryf:
If you have a suggestion, I'll be glad to change the name.
So the name and content is correct? Umm, so how did you get to the name
chart? :-) When I opened that file, I expected the class hierarchy
chart - you know, like the one
Zitat von Thaddy tha...@thaddy.com:
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Zitat von Michael Schnell mschn...@lumino.de:
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Can someone explain why in mode objfpc comparing methods only compares
the address, but not the instance?
Seems perfectly logical to me (@ = Address of, in this
Zitat von Jonas Maebe jonas.ma...@elis.ugent.be:
On 10 Sep 2009, at 14:01, Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Can someone explain why in mode objfpc comparing methods only compares
the address, but not the instance?
Seems perfectly logical to me (@ = Address of, in this case
Vincent Snijders het geskryf:
It is the compiler switches quick reference chart. Or maybe better
compiler switches quick reference card.
Ah, like the ones in the Dummies guide of ... books. :-) Then maybe
quickref.xxx is a better name than chart.xxx - that's if we limit
ourselves to 8.3 names
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Hi Michael,
I'm not picking on you, I promise! :-) I'm just doing my bit evaluating
the upcoming FPC 2.4 release - code docs.
Too late, the intercontinental ballistic missile has left
---[ ref.xxx ]---
1) In the current
Zitat von Vincent Snijders vsnijd...@vodafonevast.nl:
Jonas Maebe schreef:
On 10 Sep 2009, at 14:01, Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Can someone explain why in mode objfpc comparing methods only compares
the address, but not the instance?
Seems perfectly logical to me (@ =
I have done some horrible code where I needed to know the following:
If TSomeProc = procedure(), then is it easy to determine or set entry
vector of ThatProc: TSomeProc by stating ThatProc :=
@ProcWhereTheCodeLives_InTheCodeSegment;
It gets more difficult when you work with TSomeClassProc =
In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
2) Also the section number is a bit odd. 0.1 - but that's not really a
biggy. Maybe the section number could be left out like was done in the
ref.xxx document.
It's all about consistency. ;-)
I'll have a look at this.
Note that the
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:25:26 +, Desmond Coertzen
patrolliekapt...@gmail.com wrote:
I have done some horrible code where I needed to know the following:
If TSomeProc = procedure(), then is it easy to determine or set
entry
vector of ThatProc: TSomeProc by stating ThatProc :=
Thank you Peter.
TMethod would have been handy if i knew about this back then. For delphi
compatibility, I had to do this:
program methodpointer;
uses
Classes, sysutils;
type
TMyEvent = procedure of object;
TMyClass = class(TObject)
procedure MyMethod;
end;
{ TMyClass }
Ivo Steinmann schrieb:
1. Using =nil or Assigned should result in the same.
Afaik not, this was one of the reasons for assigned.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Zitat von Michael Schnell mschn...@lumino.de:
Mattias Gärtner wrote:
Can someone explain why in mode objfpc comparing methods only compares
the address, but not the instance?
Seems perfectly logical to me (@ = Address of, in this case code
address, the code is the same
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:52:44 +0200
Florian Klaempfl flor...@freepascal.org wrote:
Ivo Steinmann schrieb:
1. Using =nil or Assigned should result in the same.
Afaik not, this was one of the reasons for assigned.
Are there any other reasons for assigned?
Mattias
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:52:44 +0200
Florian Klaempfl flor...@freepascal.org wrote:
Ivo Steinmann schrieb:
1. Using =nil or Assigned should result in the same.
Afaik not, this was one of the reasons for assigned.
Are there any other reasons for assigned?
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:52:44 +0200
Florian Klaempfl flor...@freepascal.org wrote:
Ivo Steinmann schrieb:
1. Using =nil or Assigned should result in the same.
Afaik not, this was one of the reasons for assigned.
Are
Florian Klaempfl schrieb:
Ivo Steinmann schrieb:
1. Using =nil or Assigned should result in the same.
Afaik not, this was one of the reasons for assigned.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:52:44 +0200
Florian Klaempfl flor...@freepascal.org wrote:
Ivo Steinmann schrieb:
1. Using =nil or Assigned should result in the same.
Afaik not, this was one of the
30 matches
Mail list logo
