Rollo62

Yes I keep all project files in separate subfolders, that is the cleanest was. Nevertheless I copy first e.g. from D112 to D113, before I start from scratch. Usally that can work, using RevertToDefault and other tweaks.

Wrong code generation or not wrong code generation, I don't think that this discussions lead to anything Everybody knows the current limits of ChatGPT meanwhile. Instead of poking into the failures you should better look for ways to make use of it and to break those limits. Take this fantasic use case of GPT, to make it a "CoPilot for Delphi", programmed in just one hour. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnBKfrBHUIE That is something I would expect from the experienced programmers community here, instead of whining about this and that problems. Isn't our daily task to solve such algorithmic problems ? If you like it or not, the AI's will take over sooner as we can blink with an eye and the coming versions they will remove most of your concerns from today. I see AI as a partner and tool for now, not as a replacement of coders, and it can help us with our routine work to get the head free for more challenging stuff. From the Delphi community I see only the moaning about any such new features, same like with discussions on inline variables, instead to admit what a fantastic achivement modern AI could be soon

Great, that seems to be a good workaround. Thanks for reminding me, I usually do that ( only this time tried to be smarter again ). Taking the shortcut most of the time takes me longer in total, at least with *.dproj files. If it not would be such a ridiculous mess to re-set all parameters in the options again and again. This is on my feature whishlist no. 1

I would call it a managment of "history" in the data itself, instead of log. The log could be external too and its hard to keep that on track. What I consider is a history management within each table, where for example copies were made before changes and instead deletion its just setting flags with a timestamp. That way the latest version in a table keeps always intact and easy to undo the changes, just by manipulating the flags and timestamps. While you can decide at any point to remove the "garbage" in a table without much side-effects. Of course managing multiple, related tables can always be a headache still, but I think its more clean and easier to understand if tables can handle and encapsule their own, specific undo/redo behaviour, in contrary to a possible external, universal log management which can be very complex and tricky and failure prone.

I use this in some kind of "not-human-readable" const definitions,. for example as a central, unique definition of some medium complex SVG pathdata icons. To not confuse anybody I usually put such definitions in a separate unit then, well commented about its purpose. So I see this use case a little more practical, not just pure black-and-white, I think it can make sense in some situations.

Dont know if Mobile is relevant for your case too, but I know that some systen exceptions may be untrapped. A solution was to extract try-except into separate method and implement a kindof double try-except to ensure to catch them all.

Yes, thats what I meant. Yes, I saw a similar message, but I cannot remember any code, thats why I'm still unsure about it. There was no specific entry where to apply that "discount code" anyhow. Finally, I'm happy to get finished all this messy process, no matter if discount or not. But I personally think that tis is some kind of "cheating" and selling in a grey legal zone, which I shall not expect from a trust provider. Maybe you can call it maximize profit by business process obfuscation. In the 21th century and especially from a central trust CA, I would expect a much more fluent and state-of-the-art procedure and business operation, not requirening >10yr old outdated tools, same as Sectigo is requiring all personal stuff from us.

Yes, you mean this configuration, right ?. https://support.sectigo.com/PS_KnowledgeDetailPage?Id=kA03l000000HOFi I think that completely changes Edge to IE11 mode, if I understand that right. Alternatively I saw that option, to convert only a single page to IE11 mode, which would be more handy. Anyway I'm still waiting for approval and I will check how it works when it arrives. K-Software is only a reseller, and after that the whole processing is passed to Sectigo. Nevertheless, I'm not sure how and how to handle a renew, which should be at less cost. Strangely I have to re-order at K-Software, but a possible rebate can only processed by Sectigo, if they find out I only renew an existing account. I cannot find anything useful about renew process on their site: https://support.ksoftware.net/support/search/solutions?term=order BTW: Most of their info is more than 10 years old. Maybe for this time its already too late, but I hope next time I will learn how to smoothly pass all their obstacles best. If anybody has link to a real good and current instruction for the whole K-Software / Sectigo process in the web, would be great to share that, to be able to avoid all pitfalls in the future.

Thanks, that helps a lot. They say IE11 and Safari works, at least Safari should be fine. But tehy also claim like this I usally use Firefox, but this note and everywhere else on their page they note that only IE11 ( and now Safari) seems to work. Thats why I tries to use Edge in IE11 mode also for application, which was not presenting the captcha to get on the next page. I wondered why that happened, because Edge in IE11 should be able to generate a simple number-captcha ( not even an image ). I tried to clarify with them in a phone call, where they told my to use Chrome instead. So it seems I just have to try and check how far I get with Firefox, Edge (in IE11 mode) or Safari or Chome.

Again the renewal odysee with K-Software and Sectico ( its worse than Apple, I never thought I can say that 🙂 ). Still I hope I will get re-verified, but on the site they promised that I shall "just order", the renewal of an existing certification would be detected automatically, with a rebate. I would bet that they forget about this, at least from my phone calls to them, and in the end can be happy to get through anyway, rebate or not. What they proposed was that renewals will be easier, but I would say this is the whole procedure as usual, from a first application, it is by far the worst processes and user interface I've ever seen. Moreover, they require to use Internet Explorer only, since IE11 is the only one with such magic certification capabilities. Unfortunately the IE11 is more or less gone in my latest Win10 updates and redirected to Edge. In Edge I can open it as "Internet Explorer" mode, with a very crappy page design and odd visual outcome. Nevertheless, if this will work as expected finally, I'm happy. Does anyone know if the Edge - Internet Explorer mode works well with K-Software / Sectico certificates ? All these explainations look very much different to my Edge version. This allows a page to switch to IE11 mode and back, is that sufficient enough, or do I have to reset the whole Edge internals for certificate generation ? On their website I cannot find much current information, seems same page information as years ago.

I would see this AI not a "coder" yet but as "idea generator" or "interactive dictionary". I'm pretty much impressed how fast easy ChatGPT can produce ideas and tips from a very broad perspective and in 90% spot-on the topic and complete, only if you ask the right questions. This is what I expected though, since ChatGPT has pretty much the whole web as source, so it might probably win against humans in creating inspiring solutions of any kind (not only coding). These "solutions" are thankfully NOT out-of-the-box, otherwise you could ask: "Please program a full-fledged ERP system perfectly tailored to my company's needs" 🙂 . The people who eagerly deny such amazing breakthroughs are probably the same people who made fun of the automobile around 1900, when it began to replace horse-drawn carriages. You shouldn't oppose what you can't stop anyway, especially because ChatGPT has gone from 0 to 100 across society in absolute record time. Better to learn early to work with it, instead of against it, I think this should apply especially to programmers and technophiles who made such developments possible in the end.

Hi there, I have just stumbled about the post here, about Github CoPilot. When I checked and played around with some AI, like GPT-x, I can imagine the advantages this integrated KI might give to the programming workflow. This gives me a strong push to check out the FNC for VsCode, since I use VsCode anyway for some web projects. I'm wonderding if the CoPilot technology is limited to VsCode only, or if there are possibilities to integrate that into Delphi too ? Github says "not yet", but I think that will be provided as simple REST API as well. So maybe Embarcadero is already checking this out, this would be very cool to have new LSP + new KI one day 🙂

https://www.reddit.com/r/delphi/comments/wnhk9x/psa_github_copilot_works_with_delphi/

Probably you could use a class helper with specific access methods to mimick that behavior.

Im sure it will be available soon. I am only curious what the ChatGPT service might cost after its free period, ending in April.

Not sure if that helps with your DLL issue, but are you aware that Curl already might be installed ? https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9507353/how-do-i-install-and-use-curl-on-windows Maybe you can make use of the system one.

Sorry, maybe I did not explain my thoughts clear enough or maybe I misunderstand your meaning here, yes I think I'm on the same track with you. The inline topic was not brough up by me, and I see this only as a side issue for me ( could be easily avoided ). My though was never to use inlined function of course, only wrapped in a static function. But for all other cases this construct should be able to catch any mystical OS hardware exception ( where can be a lot ).

@Dalija Prasnikar Thanks, my goal was to solve all special, unforseeable OS hardware exception cases by double-nesting, not necessarily the inline issue. Of course according to all the above discussions, you better avoid certain configurations, like inline, in this situation and try to introduce for example a static _Internal helper method as wrapper, so to be able to catch all alien OS AVs. At least I hope so ....

If there will be any issues in the future, I'm very sure I can fix them the day after

Since it is said that such exceptions bubble up one level, maybe the naive approach will maybe lead to var P: ^Integer = nil; procedure G1; begin P^ := 42; end; begin try try G1; except //<= Let me bubble up one level writeln('Catch:G1 - if you can'); end; except writeln('Catch:G1 - pass on a 2nd level wherever needed'); end; end. Not sure if that is flawless for any kind of exceptions, any ideas ?

Sure: Everything was better in the past

Ok, I understand you have to pass medical directive, because your customer needs it. But there is probably a "grey zone" for such products too, were you could try to convince your customer. For example: Sennheiser and I think BeyerDynamics too, they have some items pretty much usable as "hearing-aids" in their portfolio. They explain such function, but they clearly not define them as "a medical device" as a main purpose. Usually the typical hearing aids would have to fall under MD, with all the consequences. https://majorhifi.com/sennheiser-reveals-conversation-clear-plus-hearing-aids/ https://www.sennheiser-hearing.com/de-DE/p/conversation-clear-plus/ DeclarationOfConformity Maybe your product can find such a "grey"-path too ? Of coarse competitors of hearing-aids might find ways to sue against such products.

I can add recipe inventor for coctails, there were already many out there ... please have a try

Yes. Sorry that all here consume too much time to find a workable solution or alternative for softtouch's issues, with or without Indy. It was also claimed that newer OpenSSL was not working and he was looking for alternatives, so then better tell us clearly in big letters that Indy and which specific 3rd Parties are a no-go.

I think Albert was slightly wrong ( only in that case ... and with his cosmological constant ). We have already a world full of idiots, but unfortunately the technology has not yet surpassed our human interactions yet, to help us out of desaster. Maybe that is the whole problem