On 2016-11-09 04:43, Lars via Lazarus wrote:
> One issue, back in the day, was that you could only use Java programming
> language, right?
Hence the name "Java Applet" ;-)
> Another issue with java applets is you had to make sure they were
> installed correctly,
No, the web server served it
(Creating a new thread instead of using "Help System with Chromium
Embedded component")
On 09.11.2016 05:38, Lars via Lazarus wrote:
On Tue, November 8, 2016 3:49 am, Michael Schnell via Lazarus wrote:
On 08.11.2016 11:42, Michael Van Canneyt via Lazarus wrote:
I seriously doubt that. It's
On Wed, 9 Nov 2016 15:57:04 +0100
Marco van de Voort via Lazarus wrote:
>[...]
> The best reason to have some local (whatever how limited) widget is for IDE
> popups of helptext instead of an external browser.
Good point.
Mattias
--
On 2016-11-09 14:57, Marco van de Voort via Lazarus wrote:
> But I think lhelp still has enough leeway, and I think Graeme greatly
> overexaggerates the problems.
And my comparison screenshots (from earlier) show the problem as clear
as day. Your comment about "LHelp works fine with fpdoc
Am 09.11.2016 um 16:02 schrieb Mattias Gaertner via Lazarus:
> On Wed, 9 Nov 2016 15:57:04 +0100
> Marco van de Voort via Lazarus wrote:
>> [...]
>> The best reason to have some local (whatever how limited) widget is for IDE
>> popups of helptext instead of an
On Wed, 9 Nov 2016 10:38:59 +0100
Michael Schnell via Lazarus wrote:
>[...]
> Hence WebASM - that seems to be based on Java - might be successful in
> pushing the idea of allowing for precompiled byte code embedded in HTML.
WebAsm <> WebAssembly.
WebAsm is "A
-> https://hacks.mozilla.org/2016/10/webassembly-browser-preview/ :
However, assuming no issues are found that require substantial time to
address, the WebAssembly Community Group would like to mark an initial
version of the standard as “done” in Q1 2017 which would then enable
browsers to