Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: > I am not proposing to make a new class. > I want a property "SingeInstance" in CustApp which activates this > automatically. I had the very same idea when this was discussed a long time ago in Lazarus list.

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On 29.09.2015 14:42, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Ondrej Pokorny wrote: OK, I see your point. Yes, I think it is possible and even not that much work to do. I programmed "multiple instances" handling into Lazarus IDE. It's the same like e.g. Adobe Photoshop or VLC player

Re: [fpc-devel] Resourcestrings and encodings

On Tuesday 29 September 2015 00:30:48 Jonas Maebe wrote: > However, I would already like to ask everyone that uses resource strings > to check FPC trunk r31881 or later with their program to ensure it still > works correctly, and also try the changed rstconv utility. See >

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Ondrej Pokorny wrote: On 29.09.2015 12:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: I added it to fpc/packages/fcl-base. It compiles OK, there are no dangerous dependencies except sysutils and classes. Michael, you added the wrong (old) unit from the bug report, not the latest

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On 29.09.2015 12:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: I added it to fpc/packages/fcl-base. It compiles OK, there are no dangerous dependencies except sysutils and classes. Michael, you added the wrong (old) unit from the bug report, not the latest simpleipc-compatible one from the mailing list.

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On 29.09.2015 15:42, Ondrej Pokorny wrote: On 29.09.2015 12:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: I added it to fpc/packages/fcl-base. It compiles OK, there are no dangerous dependencies except sysutils and classes. Michael, you added the wrong (old) unit from the bug report, not the latest

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Ondrej Pokorny wrote: > Juha, I changed the advancedipc.pas unit (this one from the mailing list is > newer than from the bug report). I can prepare a new patch for the bug > report. No need for a new patch if it did not change otherwise. I

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On 29.09.2015 15:01, Juha Manninen wrote: On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Ondrej Pokorny wrote: Juha, I changed the advancedipc.pas unit (this one from the mailing list is newer than from the bug report). I can prepare a new patch for the bug report. No need for a new

Re: [fpc-devel] Resourcestrings and encodings

Martin Schreiber wrote on Tue, 29 Sep 2015: With the changes finally MSEi18n can support Unicode resourcestrings for FPC 3.1.1, see http://mseide-msegui.sourceforge.net/pics/msei18n_fpc_3_0.png Thank you very much. Thanks for testing. Jonas ___

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Juha Manninen wrote: On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: I am not proposing to make a new class. I want a property "SingeInstance" in CustApp which activates this automatically. I had the very same idea when this was

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: > For simpleIPC, yes. But the new implementation has no dependencies except > sysutils, classes. So the argument becomes void. It adds extra code to every application. Maybe not too much though. > ... > That is

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Ondrej Pokorny wrote: On 29.09.2015 15:35, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: 1. Using a LCL component means that you must instantiate a form/datamodule first. By that time, a database connection may already have been made (just to name something), which is exactly what

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On 29.09.2015 15:35, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: 1. Using a LCL component means that you must instantiate a form/datamodule first. By that time, a database connection may already have been made (just to name something), which is exactly what you want to avoid. The check for single

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Ondrej Pokorny wrote: On 29.09.2015 13:50, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: You may not think this is important, but for beginners, this can be a tremendous aid. The easier we make it, the better. Lazarus is a RAD environment, after all. Michael. OK, I see your point.

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On 29.09.2015 12:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: I added it to fpc/packages/fcl-base. It compiles OK, there are no dangerous dependencies except sysutils and classes. Michael, you added the wrong (old) unit from the bug report, not the latest simpleipc-compatible one from the mailing list.

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Ondrej Pokorny wrote: > Michael Van Canneyt & Tomas Hajny & everybody who wants to test: > > I prepared a fully compatible AdvancedIPC unit. See the attachment. > ... Michael and Tomas, I am planning to copy AdvancedIPC temporarily to Lazarus

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On 29.09.2015 13:50, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: You may not think this is important, but for beginners, this can be a tremendous aid. The easier we make it, the better. Lazarus is a RAD environment, after all. Michael. OK, I see your point. Yes, I think it is possible and even not that

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Ondrej Pokorny wrote: On 29.09.2015 12:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: I added it to fpc/packages/fcl-base. It compiles OK, there are no dangerous dependencies except sysutils and classes. Thanks! Juha, if you want to implement the single IDE instance, then I would

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, September 29, 2015 12:30, Juha Manninen wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Ondrej Pokorny wrote: >> Michael Van Canneyt & Tomas Hajny & everybody who wants to test: >> >> I prepared a fully compatible AdvancedIPC unit. See the attachment. >> ... > > Michael and

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On 29.09.2015 12:52, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: I added it to fpc/packages/fcl-base. It compiles OK, there are no dangerous dependencies except sysutils and classes. Thanks! Juha, if you want to implement the single IDE instance, then I would like to ask you to implement this in

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Tomas Hajny wrote: On Tue, September 29, 2015 12:30, Juha Manninen wrote: On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Ondrej Pokorny wrote: Michael Van Canneyt & Tomas Hajny & everybody who wants to test: I prepared a fully compatible AdvancedIPC unit. See the

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote: 2015-09-29 11:50 GMT-03:00 Luiz Americo Pereira Camara < luizameri...@gmail.com>: It can be used without the component. The component is just a convenience. See the examples

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

2015-09-29 10:35 GMT-03:00 Michael Van Canneyt : > > > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Juha Manninen wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Michael Van Canneyt >> wrote: >> >>> I am not proposing to make a new class. >>> I want a property "SingeInstance"

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote: 2. Then it is only available in visually designed applications. Services, website servers and custom console apps are non-visual. I am specificially thinking FastCGI processes. See above I didn't say it could not be done with

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

2015-09-29 11:50 GMT-03:00 Luiz Americo Pereira Camara < luizameri...@gmail.com>: > > > It can be used without the component. The component is just a convenience. > See the examples > https://github.com/blikblum/luipack/blob/master/uniqueinstance/testraw/project1.lpr Luiz

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

Unit uniqueinstanceraw Please look carefully Luiz Em 29/09/2015 12:01, "Michael Van Canneyt" escreveu: > > > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote: > > 2015-09-29 11:50 GMT-03:00 Luiz Americo Pereira Camara < >> luizameri...@gmail.com>: >> >> >>> >>> It

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On 29.09.2015 16:09, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: Both are OK. Use of one does not exclude use of the other. I was going to add it in CustApp anyway as soon as I had looked at your implementation. I started working on the CustApp variant. It's even simpler than the LCL component because you

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote: On the other side, i still think that should be kept out of TCustomApplication. Well, I have already explained why I want it exactly there :) While the simple requirement of checking another instance is easy to implement into

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Ondrej Pokorny wrote: On 29.09.2015 16:09, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: Both are OK. Use of one does not exclude use of the other. I was going to add it in CustApp anyway as soon as I had looked at your implementation. I started working on the CustApp variant. It's

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote: Unit uniqueinstanceraw Please look carefully My sincere apologies, I was too fast and indeed opened the wrong unit. uniqueinstance, and uniqueinstancebase, not uniqueinstanceraw :( So, it could be used as well, if we can sort

Re: [fpc-devel] simpleipc issues

2015-09-29 16:12 GMT-03:00 Michael Van Canneyt : > > > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote: > > Unit uniqueinstanceraw >> > > >> Please look carefully >> > > My sincere apologies, > > No problem. To be clear, i don't plead to uniqueinstance be used by