On Friday 11 December 2015 08:05:12 Sven Barth wrote:
> Am 10.12.2015 23:04 schrieb "Mattias Gaertner" :
> >
> > What about:
> >
> > UTF8Delete(AnsiString(Pointer(s)),1,1);
>
> While the typecast itself would probably work I strongly advice against it
> since you're relying on implementation detail
Am 10.12.2015 23:04 schrieb "Mattias Gaertner" :
>
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 19:59:26 +0100
> Sven Barth wrote:
>
> > Am 10.12.2015 19:53 schrieb "Juha Manninen" :
> >[...]
> > > A typecast can be used as a workaround now.
> > > UTF8String and AnsiString have the same memory layout so it should
work.
Am 11.12.2015 06:52 schrieb "Jürgen Hestermann" :
>
>
>
> Am 2015-12-10 um 18:22 schrieb Juha Manninen:
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Jürgen Hestermann
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> How can I use UTF8Delete on an UTF8string?
>>
>> You can't. Please read this :
>> http://wiki.freepascal.org/Better_U
Hi,
I have many libraries (dll,so) and they come with wrappers with constant
library path and file name. I want to move these libraries to a specific
folder and load from there so one way I know is to change them and load
them dynamicly but I cant do it every time new library version came out
with
On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 19:59:26 +0100
Sven Barth wrote:
> Am 10.12.2015 19:53 schrieb "Juha Manninen" :
>[...]
> > A typecast can be used as a workaround now.
> > UTF8String and AnsiString have the same memory layout so it should work.
>
> This has nothing to do with the memory layout. Both Utf8Str
Am 10.12.2015 19:53 schrieb "Juha Manninen" :
>
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 8:18 PM, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
> > IMO, there should be overloaded versions for UTF8* functions that
> > explicitely accept UTF8String.
> > Or am I wrong?
>
> You are right. I did not even think so far yet.
> A typecast can
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 8:18 PM, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
> IMO, there should be overloaded versions for UTF8* functions that
> explicitely accept UTF8String.
> Or am I wrong?
You are right. I did not even think so far yet.
A typecast can be used as a workaround now.
UTF8String and AnsiString have t
On 10.12.2015 18:36, Juha Manninen wrote:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Jürgen Hestermann
wrote:
Then why does the compiler complain when I
feed UTF8Delete with an UTF8String?
As it told you. It got UTF8String but expected AnsiString. I think it
would work with a typecast but that is quite
On 10.12.2015 18:41, Ondrej Pokorny wrote:
Why do you insist in using UTF8Delete? Use just Delete:
var
xUF: UTF8String;
begin
Delete(xUF, 1, 1);
end;
Sorry, of course you want to specify position/length in real chars.
Ondrej
--
___
Lazarus mail
On 10.12.2015 18:29, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
Am 2015-12-10 um 18:22 schrieb Juha Manninen:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Jürgen Hestermann
wrote:
How can I use UTF8Delete on an UTF8string?
You can't. Please read this :
http://wiki.freepascal.org/Better_Unicode_Support_in_Lazarus
"Stri
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Jürgen Hestermann
wrote:
> Then why does the compiler complain when I
> feed UTF8Delete with an UTF8String?
As it told you. It got UTF8String but expected AnsiString. I think it
would work with a typecast but that is quite useless. Just use a
String instead.
In fa
Am 2015-12-10 um 18:22 schrieb Juha Manninen:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Jürgen Hestermann
wrote:
How can I use UTF8Delete on an UTF8string?
You can't. Please read this :
http://wiki.freepascal.org/Better_Unicode_Support_in_Lazarus
"String" type is UTF-8 and it works now (almost) tra
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Jürgen Hestermann
wrote:
> How can I use UTF8Delete on an UTF8string?
You can't. Please read this :
http://wiki.freepascal.org/Better_Unicode_Support_in_Lazarus
"String" type is UTF-8 and it works now (almost) transparently without
explicit conversions.
Juha
--
Today I tried Lazarus 1.6 RC1 (on Windows 7 32 bit).
The installation hat a problem with missing access rights.
I chose to uninstall the previous version but afterwards
some folders of fpc 2.4 still existed and I did not have
access rights to these folders. I am not sure whether
this was caused b
On 12/10/2015 01:42 PM, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
So it does not provide an Event-Handling infrastructure and this (in
according to my terms) means it is not a ("Delphi Style") application,
hence not a "Service Application".
A service needs more than an event queue. See the lazdaemon package.
Th
On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 13:18:58 +0100
Michael Schnell wrote:
>
> > On 12/09/2015 11:45 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
>
> >> Please take a look at the NoGUI widgetset. It does not use another
> >> Queue.
> If it does not use "another queue" but the one provided by the fpc RTL
> (i.e. does not insta
On 2015-12-10 12:05, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> I guess you mean the zip releases on sourceforge. I added a note to the
> sourceforge README.txt.
Thanks for that.
Regards,
- Graeme -
My public PGP key: http://tinyurl.com/graeme-pgp
--
___
Lazarus
On 12/09/2015 11:45 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Please take a look at the NoGUI widgetset. It does not use another
Queue.
If it does not use "another queue" but the one provided by the fpc RTL
(i.e. does not install it's own queue), and (obviously) does not use a
queue that is related to a
On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 09:24:43 +
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
>[...]
> If not already, this info needs to be placed somewhere on the Wiki.
I added the release history here:
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Version_Numbering
> Lazarus doesn't supply installers (lazarus + fpc) for all supported
>
On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 10:07:09 +
Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
>[...]
> >> ! /usr/local/bin/lazarus-1.4.2+3.0.0
> >
> > 1.4.2 used FPC 2.6.4.
> > 1.6 will be the first release with FPC 3.0.
>
> Those are tested combinations. 1.4.2 (which was the latest 1.4.x when I
> did the work) works reliably
Mattias Gaertner wrote:
On Wed, 09 Dec 2015 14:31:20 +
Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
[...]
Quite frankly I feel that the Lazarus version numbering is progressing
faster than is reasonable, and that it would be highly desirable to have
a "Long Term Support" v2.0.x or even 3.0.x which could be
On 2015-12-09 15:27, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
>> >[...]
>> > ! /usr/local/bin/lazarus-0.9.24+2.2.4
>> > ! /usr/local/bin/lazarus-0.9.26+2.2.4
>> > ! /usr/local/bin/lazarus-0.9.28+2.4.0
>> > ! /usr/local/bin/lazarus-0.9.30+2.4.4
>> > ! /usr/local/bin/lazarus-1.0.0+2.4.4
>> > ! /usr/local/bin/lazarus-
On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 02:31:20PM +, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
> Quite frankly I feel that the Lazarus version numbering is progressing
> faster than is reasonable, and that it would be highly desirable to have
> a "Long Term Support" v2.0.x or even 3.0.x which could be presented to
> people
23 matches
Mail list logo
