Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Sherlock

    Check for override

    FMX comes to mind. The first few versions rarely had anything in common other than the base language. But then...that was work in progress.
  3. dummzeuch

    List of all uses clause items in the whole project

    Possibly a bug
  4. Yesterday
  5. PeterPanettone

    List of all uses clause items in the whole project

    OK, I get it. But then, why I don't get indirect units in the same way if I select a directly used unit node in the left tree: In this case, even the "Unit Uses" tab does not show any used units in "ToolsApi".pas, although it has a uses clause:
  6. Dmitry Arefiev

    Check for override

    Could you please provide some tickets to better understand what and where.
  7. Clément

    10.3.1 has been released

    Yeap. It's happening also here.
  8. dummzeuch

    List of all uses clause items in the whole project

    ... and then you switch to the "indirect dependencies" tab and ... ?
  9. PeterPanettone

    List of all uses clause items in the whole project

    Thomas, what do you mean by "contains all units of the project"? When I select the root node "GExpertsRS103.dproj" on the left side then only the GX_* project units are displayed in the "Unit Uses" tab on the right side: ... and no indirectly used units are displayed in this tab.
  10. Stefan Glienke

    Check for override

    I did exactly that. And that is why I wrote "a clear guide at hand how to solve it" - breaking changes without a migration guide are bad. I have seen many occasions where Borgearcadera justified not fixing bugs with "backwards compatibility" to keep broken code working and push the need to keep writing code in a broken way (design wise or literally) or added ridiculous workarounds into the code to fix something but without the necessity for anyone to fix their code - and I am not talking about subtle and hard to track things. But then on the other hand break things every other version just because...
  11. Anders Melander

    Check for override

    Ehem.. I think you should speak for yourself and not put these labels on the motives of other developers you know nothing about. Breaking backward compatibility is easy. Maintaining it is often very hard. I have seen many examples of projects that have stranded on old versions of 3rd party libraries because it was simply to costly to locate and fix breaking changes. That said I naturally agree that one should strive to move code forward and eliminate dependencies on backward compatibility.
  12. timfrost

    New features in GExperts

    In my case the problem of the inability to select CPU view is related to MMX, but I also now agree with you that GExperts is involved also. I have been experimenting with both the checkboxes in the Delphi IDE key mappings, and the key mappings display in GExperts, and there are inconsistencies. I also tried Ctrl-Alt-D which picks an MMX action, even though Gexperts shows it in yellow.
  13. joongtang

    Grep search and DFM files

    I have wanted this feature until long time ago. Thanks for advance.
  14. PeterPanettone

    List of all uses clause items in the whole project

    Thomas, you are right. However, this is not a merged list without duplicates in the strict sense because in the following case ComCtrls is being listed twice: uPDFViewer,ComCtrls SkinDemoUtils,ComCtrls So, the exported list is certainly useful. But for my purpose, I need to remove the duplicates.
  15. Stefan Glienke

    Check for override

    "Backwards compatibility" is the ultimate excuse to pile up garbage in your backyard ... It is used or ignored whenever convenient - moving forward also includes getting a compile error in your face but with a clear guide at hand how to solve it. If you ever inherited from a TDataSet and used one of its method that have TBookmark or TRecordBuffer arguments while writing code for different Delphi versions since 2010 or so you know what I mean. But some developers seem to rather want to save an hour when moving their code to a new version and waste hours or days later hunting down a bug. 😉
  16. Dalija Prasnikar

    Check for override

    That change was not worth while even back then. You had two variants for Seek and it was very easy to use wrong one. If you used 32 bit one on streams that support 64 bit your code would only work for streams smaller than 2GB. Change didn't affected older code, but it had permanent negative effect on new code. I encountered such bugs myself, and also have seen others bumping into it on numerous occasions. Yes, at the end our code was at fault, but it was really easy mistake to make. There was several bug reports around that issue at the time in old Quality Central.
  17. dummzeuch

    List of all uses clause items in the whole project

    That list already contained all used units, including those indirectly used. And the list for the project (root node in the tree) contains all units of the project.
  18. Anders Melander

    Check for override

    Are you saying that it wasn't worth it back when the change was made or that it isn't worth it anymore (i.e. today)? IMO the change was definitely worth it at the time because it didn't break backward compatibility and AFAIR didn't introduce new problems. They could have marked the old methods deprecated at some point and eventually retired it completely. AFAIK the change didn't introduce any new problems in older TStream descendants with 2+Gb files - it just made them possible going forward. If you have examples of bugs then I'd love to hear of them.
  19. Dalija Prasnikar

    Check for override

    YES, backward compatibility matters. But in cases where backward compatibility causes more trouble down the road, then it is not worth the price. In this case, maintaining backward compatibility also opened TStream and descendant classes to subtle bugs when working with streams larger than 2GB.
  20. PeterPanettone

    GExperts Grep can use the MAP file

    Thomas, that is an important addition, thank you very much! You wrote in your blog: There could be cases where the fallback is not evident because the map file creation has failed for some reason while the user believes the map file is being used because he has checked that option in the Options dialog. Therefore, I feel it would be better having a checkbox directly in the Grep Search dialog: "Indirectly used units" in the "Delphi Code Content Types" group-box: This checkbox would be automatically disabled in the case no map file exists so the user is AWARE that no indirectly used units (I call them implicit units) can be searched.
  21. Anders Melander

    Check for override

    Good thing you're not in charge of the RTL then. IRL backward compatibility matters.
  22. Rudy Velthuis

    Check for override

    I would not have done that. I would have let the code break.
  23. PeterPanettone

    List of all uses clause items in the whole project

    Thomas, I've built #2590. But I don't see where I can display and/or export a merged list of all used units in the whole project. The list created by "Export Used Units..." is the same as before. BTW, is there somewhere a possibility to see the current version/release number in the IDE, because both the old and the new show the same version number:
  24. mael

    New features in GExperts

    I replied there. Couldn't find my old account information, so I had to make a new one. As can be seen there this is not related to MMX, and I did not make a wrong bug report @timfrost.
  25. Stefan Glienke

    Check for override

    If the method you avoid to call would do heavy work... but even using the fastest approach to check if the method is overridden will be slower than just doing a virtual call on a method that just returns False. And even if you perform that check only once and store it in a boolean field it's just not worth it imo.
  26. dummzeuch

    List of all uses clause items in the whole project

    Was already used, that was the first thing I checked.
  1. Load more activity
×