Hello,
Does anyone know what would be the solution for implementing timer
support in a X11 toolkit? I already have TTimer support implemented
for LCL-CustomDrawn-Windows, Cocoa and Android (but Android is the
best tested of them), but it looks like X11 has no support for timers,
so I wonder what
On 21/12/11 11:06, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
Hello,
Does anyone know what would be the solution for implementing timer
support in a X11 toolkit? I already have TTimer support implemented
for LCL-CustomDrawn-Windows, Cocoa and Android (but Android is the
best tested of them), but it
Henry Vermaak wrote:
On 21/12/11 11:06, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
Hello,
Does anyone know what would be the solution for implementing timer
support in a X11 toolkit? I already have TTimer support implemented
for LCL-CustomDrawn-Windows, Cocoa and Android (but Android is the
best
On 21/12/11 12:36, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Henry Vermaak wrote:
On 21/12/11 11:06, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
Hello,
Does anyone know what would be the solution for implementing timer
support in a X11 toolkit? I already have TTimer support implemented
for LCL-CustomDrawn-Windows,
In our previous episode, Jonas Maebe said:
undefined reference to `FPC_SYSC_GETRLIMIT'
Yes, it seems like a missing public alias for the FpGetRLimit function in
the Linux system unit.
I added it.
___
fpc-pascal maillist -
On 21/12/11 14:53, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
wow, I started taking a look at how to do it and as always with
anything related to X11 it is terribly complicated ... but luckly I am
not alone here using FPC, so I shamelessly stole code from fpgui,
hammered it a little bit to fit TTimer
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Henry Vermaak henry.verm...@gmail.com wrote:
Spinning like this is bad news for efficiency and battery life of embedded
devices.
Well, using X11 in an embedded device by itself is a very bad choice
=D And that's why it is very rare and linux-based phones don't
On 21/12/11 15:56, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Henry Vermaakhenry.verm...@gmail.com wrote:
Spinning like this is bad news for efficiency and battery life of embedded
devices.
Well, using X11 in an embedded device by itself is a very bad choice
Better
On 12/21/2011 04:53 PM, Henry Vermaak wrote:
On 21/12/11 14:53, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
wow, I started taking a look at how to do it and as always with
anything related to X11 it is terribly complicated ... but luckly I am
not alone here using FPC, so I shamelessly stole code from
On Wed, 21 Dec 2011, Henry Vermaak wrote:
On 21/12/11 15:56, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Henry Vermaakhenry.verm...@gmail.com
wrote:
Spinning like this is bad news for efficiency and battery life of embedded
devices.
Well, using X11 in an embedded
On 21/12/11 16:11, Martin Schreiber wrote:
On 12/21/2011 04:53 PM, Henry Vermaak wrote:
On 21/12/11 14:53, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
wow, I started taking a look at how to do it and as always with
anything related to X11 it is terribly complicated ... but luckly I am
not alone here
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Henry Vermaak henry.verm...@gmail.com wrote:
You're still guessing a timer interval of 10ms to add to the timer if the
select() doesn't time out. So your error can be as much as 990ms per
iteration of the loop. So much for precision then.
select() doesn't
On 21 December 2011 18:06, Marco van de Voort mar...@stack.nl wrote:
Not likely with Linux-only stuff in the same msg. That's where I stopped
reading pretty much.
What linux only stuff? Since when does posix mean linux only? Spare
us the linux phobia, please. Googling for timer_create bsd
On Wednesday 21 December 2011 20:10:49 Marco van de Voort wrote:
I've been thinking about this myself, and if you don't want bad timers, the
most logical route would be to write a scheduler implementation where the
scheduler
1) in principle waits till the next registered event (events can be
On 12/21/2011 20:27, nore...@z505.com wrote:
Also delphi is
more strict when it comes to PROGRAM name parsing. In freepascal the
program name can mismatch the file name, whereas delphi stops compiling
and tells you error.
i've never known this (program name must equal filename) to be a
On 12/21/2011 20:27, nore...@z505.com wrote:
Also delphi is
more strict when it comes to PROGRAM name parsing. In freepascal the
program name can mismatch the file name, whereas delphi stops compiling
and tells you error.
i've never known this (program name must equal filename) to be a
On 21 December 2011 18:06, Henry Vermaak wrote:
embedded devices, laptops have batteries, too. You're wasting CPU and power
just spinning around a loop, so even if your app isn't active, it's still
waking up every 50ms. I don't consider this very good programming practice.
I'm always
17 matches
Mail list logo
