Hi,
The converter is improving gradually in SVN trunk.
Converting the source code works better and there is an option to support
Delphi compatibility with conditional compilation.
For Lazarus / LCL code, Windows is now replaced with LCLIntf, LCLType
and LMessages.
I realized there are other
26.02.2010 21:28, Juha Manninen wrote:
Hi,
The converter is improving gradually in SVN trunk.
Converting the source code works better and there is an option to support
Delphi compatibility with conditional compilation.
For Lazarus / LCL code, Windows is now replaced with LCLIntf, LCLType
and
On 2/26/2010 10:16, Juha Manninen wrote:
Personally I don't understand why someone would make a Windows-only program
using a multi-platform system like FPC / Lazarus.
...but that's just my thought...
why? because they only work with winwhatever systems and they can't afford or
simply don't
Personally I don't understand why someone would make a Windows-only program
using a multi-platform system like FPC / Lazarus.
...but that's just my thought...
Do you know a similar open source Pascal compiler/IDE
that is for Windows only? If yes, let me know, I will try it.
If not, what are
* The first is the usual dialog where converter inform us that some
properties are invalid and offer us to remove them. But this dialog needs
some improvement for example when there is a component on form resource that
is unknown, such as the case of for example TRichedit, maybe because it's
Hi,
Is there anyway I could try out your Lazarus delphi converter improvements?
I made a GitHub repository with my converter branch. It is an extra step but
not really complicated for anyone interested in this feature. It is actually
only 4 command line commands.
http
Juha Manninen schrieb:
The original problem has nothing to do with revision control systems.
Parts of Lazarus code is known by very few people and they are busy. It is
nobody's fault of course but still it leads to patches being ignored.
One cannot sit at home and wait for new patches coming
Juha Manninen wrote:
The original problem has nothing to do with revision control systems.
Parts of Lazarus code is known by very few people and they are busy. It is
nobody's fault of course but still it leads to patches being ignored.
Something should be done to fix this situation.
Your
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 12:15:19PM +0200, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Juha Manninen wrote:
That's what I do also.
A separate branch is good for new experimental features which would break
the
main project somehow. However, my patches clearly fix issues of an existing
The workflow we
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 01:56:06PM +0100, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
There is 1 case where this can occur, namely when you do
svn+ssh:// - http://
even though it is the same repository, if you change protocol it will
download the whole repository again.
In all the years that I use
Paul Nicholls wrote:
Is there anyway I could try out your Lazarus delphi converter improvements?
What is the procedure for this?
Any comments from Lazarus developers?
Juha
--
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
http
Juha Manninen schreef:
Paul Nicholls wrote:
Is there anyway I could try out your Lazarus delphi converter improvements?
What is the procedure for this?
Any comments from Lazarus developers?
How to try out a patch from others is explained here:
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org
Juha Manninen schreef:
Vincent Snijders wrote:
How to try out a patch from others is explained here:
http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Creating_A_Patch#Applying_a_patch
Yes I know.
I was just hoping for comments on the original problem.
Oh, but that was not the question from Paul Nicholls.
--- El jue 4-feb-10, Juha Manninen juha.manni...@phnet.fi escribió:
De:: Juha Manninen juha.manni...@phnet.fi
Asunto: Re: [Lazarus] Delphi converter improvements
A: Lazarus mailing list lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
Fecha: jueves 4 de febrero de 2010, 11:45
Paul Nicholls wrote
Juha Manninen wrote:
That's what I do also.
A separate branch is good for new experimental features which would break the
main project somehow. However, my patches clearly fix issues of an existing
A workflow we have adopted at work allows for experimental features,
maintenance branches, an
Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
I think Lazarus could benefit from such a workflow too. There seems to be
more and more experimental feature that go untested because they are
experimental. Getting more developers to simply switch to another branch
at allow testing of new features before they go to
Hi.
I know a number of people who would be interested in your delphi
converter, including myself :)
Good to know!
(Although it is not really MY converter, but I am willing to improve it.)
An easy to use 3d modeling package has now gone open source:
www.delgine.com
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Years of experience with fpc showed that very few people are testing
such branches. Even rcs aren't intensively tested, just look at the
resource trouble with fpc 2.4.0
Not to get into all that again (you can read the archives), but SubVersion
doesn't lend itself to
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Years of experience with fpc showed that very few people are testing
such branches. Even rcs aren't intensively tested, just look at the
resource trouble with fpc 2.4.0
Not to get into all that again (you can read the archives), but SubVersion
Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Years of experience with fpc showed that very few people are testing
such branches. Even rcs aren't intensively tested, just look at the
resource trouble with fpc 2.4.0
Not to get into all that again (you can read the archives),
Yes, you
Marc Weustink schrieb:
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Years of experience with fpc showed that very few people are testing
such branches. Even rcs aren't intensively tested, just look at the
resource trouble with fpc 2.4.0
Not to get into all that again (you can read the
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:18 AM, Florian Klaempfl flor...@freepascal.org wrote:
Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
I think Lazarus could benefit from such a workflow too. There seems to be
more and more experimental feature that go untested because they are
experimental. Getting more developers to
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
flor...@ubuntu32:~/fpc/branches/trunk$ svn switch
http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/branches/fixes_2_4 log
flor...@ubuntu32:~/fpc/branches/trunk$ ifconfig eth0 | grep RX bytes
RX bytes:57681323 (57.6 MB) TX bytes:1814129 (1.8 MB)
OK, so I create a patch
Marc Weustink wrote:
simple svn statement and a few secs waiting.
svn switch
But that downloads the whole repository every time you run that command.
See my reply to Florian why this is an issue.
Regards,
- Graeme -
--
fpGUI Toolkit - a cross-platform GUI toolkit using Free Pascal
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Marc Weustink wrote:
simple svn statement and a few secs waiting.
svn switch
But that downloads the whole repository every time you run that command.
See my reply to Florian why this is an issue.
Then you do something wrong. It only downloads the diff.
Marc
Graeme Geldenhuys schreef:
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
flor...@ubuntu32:~/fpc/branches/trunk$ svn switch
http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/branches/fixes_2_4 log
flor...@ubuntu32:~/fpc/branches/trunk$ ifconfig eth0 | grep RX bytes
RX bytes:57681323 (57.6 MB) TX bytes:1814129 (1.8 MB)
Graeme Geldenhuys schrieb:
Marc Weustink wrote:
simple svn statement and a few secs waiting.
svn switch
But that downloads the whole repository every time you run that command.
Who says that? His Godness Linus? Even the best compression cannot fold
the FPC sources into 0.5 MB.
--
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Marc Weustink wrote:
simple svn statement and a few secs waiting.
svn switch
But that downloads the whole repository every time you run that command.
This is not correct. It downloads a diff. I do this multiple times a day.
Try it.
Flávio Etrusco schrieb:
Florian, I for one - which had tried some branches only a few times -
think that the main culprits for this is lack of
information/advertisement of these/the relevant branches
But this is not svn's fault. We can tell only people to test RCs, no
more no less.
--
Marc Weustink wrote:
Then you do something wrong. It only downloads the diff.
Then my svn repository was seriously screwed or something, because it took
forever and downloaded for ages. Since then I abandoned the idea of
branches with SubVersion. [...I have to add, this was 3+ years ago...]
03.02.2010 19:46, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Then my svn repository was seriously screwed or something, because it took
forever and downloaded for ages. Since then I abandoned the idea of
branches with SubVersion. [...I have to add, this was 3+ years ago...]
I don't think that it is a good
Florian Klaempfl wrote:
But this is not svn's fault. We can tell only people to test RCs, no
more no less.
I tested 2.4.0-rc since the day it was announced. For once I did my part
and even noted those issues in the wiki. But like YOU and other Lazarus
team developers, the resources bug eluded
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Marc Weustink wrote:
Then you do something wrong. It only downloads the diff.
Then my svn repository was seriously screwed or something, because it took
forever and downloaded for ages. Since then I abandoned the idea of
branches with
- Original Message -
From: Juha Manninen juha.manni...@phnet.fi
To: Lazarus mailing list lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 9:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Lazarus] Delphi converter improvements
Hi.
I know a number of people who would be interested
03.02.2010 5:04, Juha Manninen wrote:
What you say?
When I first saw your converter patches I decided that first someone
need to check the style of your patches. If it is wrong then correct
you. And then we can give you rights to commit to delphi converter. I
asked Mattias to review since
35 matches
Mail list logo
