Rollo62

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

Thanks for the info, I see two products of yours supporting OpenSSL: - The sgcWebSockets ( which needs to be the Enterprise version, wich comes with SSL and many other features ) - or the sgcIndy ( which seems to be SSL alone addition to normal Indy, but I assume this will solve the SSL issues ) Can you please tell us the strategy behind: Is the "WebSockets Enterprise" = "WebSockets package" + "sgcIndy package" ? Or are the SSL implementations in sgcWebSockets Enterprise and scgIndy somewhat different ? Both should come with all cross-platform binaries of latest SSL. Can I start with sgcWebSocket Professional and then add sgcIndy later, will I got the same as in sgcWebSockets Enterprise ?

This is the modern way of pair-programming, where also the human pair-partner can say something complete stupid from time to time. I see not much difference, only that ChatGPT has a lot more knowledge than a junior-pair-partner might have. Yaaaaa, its ONLY a text-processor ( byte by byte ) ... who cares ?

I'm not afraid of new technology, robots, KI, self-driving cars, ... but I'm very unsure if I would risk to meet your robot anytime soon The full reality is maybe that all the coolest, newest hip technolgy out there in the streets will be "Spagetti" to some degree Good technology need usually also some time to get ripe.

That is pretty much true ( for Europe and still UK ). Maybe the first question should be: For which countries(s) do you want to apply conformity, the IEC 62304 itself should be valid pretty much world-wide. For USA, Australia, Japan, ... I have no idea howto reach conformity for medical software, only that this is a completely different process.

I think the kind of language is the least problem you will face. Here is a short summary of the current changes, unfortunately in German, but I think it might help anyway. You will have to do a lot of documentation, tests and verifications around the code, where the "safety" of a language is mostly defined by how you organize and implement your apps and workflows.

Hi there, I'm working cross-platform under Macos Monterey, Win10, VmWare Fusion for quite a while now, without using TPM in my VM's. Now I am more and more forced to use TPM as well and after the current Macos Ventura I face a lot of performace issues, not only under Mac itself, so probably I consider real hardware issues too. Thats why I try to move my projects now from VmWare to Parallels now, which should have a better hardware support and performance for Macos and M1 chips in general. Currently I'm checking out Parallels Desktop Professional and the possible impacts when using it. Generally speaking Parallels and VmWare offer many similar properties and its not too difficult to get it running. Unfortunatly I cannot import my current VmWare VM's there, this always refuses, even Parallels support couldn'T help much. Thats why I have to set up complete clean, new VM's now and I want to ensure they were future-proof (Win11), while my old VM's were not So that means using the virtual TPM-Chip is a must, to allow an upgrade to Win11 later one day. With TPM you cannot easily move or clone VM's anymore, so my workflow needs to be a bit updated then. 'No matter if VmWare or Parallels, when you move to another host PC, you have to transfer not only the VM but also the TPM-Password. Here is a nice explanation how a transfer from one physical Mac to another Mac can be done, but the question is not Mac-related only. Maybe someone had faced these TPM topics before and found a clever way howto ensure that VM's can be cloned and transferred without big hazzle, even if it includes TPM ? Best of course to switch on/off the TPM, wherever needed. Of course a "moved" VM has same MAC-Adress and UUID, so there should be only one VM active at the same time in a network. Interesting for me is to clone with separate "MAC-Adress and UUID" to testing, which could be used for fast, separate test, but it should not crash the whole network than if accidentily running both. Yes, I should use Snapshots for that, but I want to avoid to clutter and risk damage to my original VM, thats why I prefer complete cones instead. Another use-case is to make clones from a general template VM, all this won't be easily possible with VM any longer. How do you organize your VM-ecosystem including TPM, is there still a way to workaround TPM in VM's ?

VmWare VM is not working under Parallels for me, at least not the ones I want to. There is a conversion tool, right in the beginning, which immediately fails with little or no errors. Even the Parallels support couldn't solve that, so I have to re-create a clean Parallels VM anyway. More headache to come, it seems that Parallels VM on Intel cannot be ported easily between Parallels M1. Only exchange by copy disk data is a way they provide. https://kb.parallels.com/125344 So then a breakdown of Macos-Intel will require a brand new VM-Setup under M1 anyway, and M1 will be the next Macos for sure, as I think Macos-Intel will be deprecated. Parallels VMs are not interchangeable between Intel <-> M1, no matter if TPM. Copying of harddrives should be easily possible, if not using Bitlocker ( encrypting by TPM ), which I do not consider to use in my VMs, so thats OK for me, but I thought the TPM will encrypt or certify some parts of the Windows-OS. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/windows-11-requires-tpm-what-why-matters-rand-morimoto Ok, at least the VM data seems to be safe by direkct access of the hard drive files, but the OS and probably all installations and configurations of applications seems to be lost. Microsoft says https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/information-protection/bitlocker/bitlocker-countermeasure Is this meant as an option, when Bitlocker is activated ? From my assumption TPM is doing the latter, no matter if Bitlocker is activated, or not. If TPM recognizes any changes, then it prohibits booting the OS and I assume this cannot be reset somehow. It seems my TPM-less days will be gone soon and I have to optimize the process of setting up a new, clean VM ( which I already did ). At least the cloning and copying from "template VM" seems to work still on the same machine. From my tests I can use the Parallels "Clone" function, as well as the copy-and-paste of the *.pvm images, to create a derivate of my template VM. The derivate VMs seem to stay activated, as far as I can see. Conditions: No Bitlocker used, No more than one of the "cloned VM" active at a time

With some experiments, it seems that it doesn't work so seamlessly as described in the Parallels description: There is not only one entry storing the TPM password, but there were two ( /System and /iCloud ). Both contain the same Password, when I extract that from KeyChain, looks similar to this: 0a9dfe9dbabcdfgdsddf4678fc3defsf5fs5fs67hd7n8899f086b795cc9a1509c3 The only difference seems what is so called "Location" - System: One time with Account number added - iCloud: One time without All the rest, including password seems identical. When I try to copy the entries into my own, custom KeyChain Bundle, then I can only copy one f the two versions, so I assume "System" is the right type. IMHO the best way to copy that, is - Unlock the "System" and "Your Custom" Bundle by right click - Unlock - Select the left "System" KeyChain Bundle - Enter the "TPM" in the search field - Sort by the Key type "System" - Select and right click copy all the "System" entries - Ignore the "iCloud" entries, they seem to be not necessary - Select the left "Custom" KeyChain Bundle - To right click and insert them all into the custom bundle - The Custom Keychain Bundle "MB02_Pls_TPM.keychain-db" is for example stored under /User/Library/Keychains, and can be copied to another machine. - Such KeyStore could be Added to another machine hopefully - From there, on the new macnine, the TPM could be copied from "Custom" to "System" to make the VM work again Is there a better way to it ?

Thanks for the info, I have two Macs, wile only one is for current development. I also want to ensure that I won't end up in desaster when this maching breaks down one day, if I would consider TPM too late this will break my neck. A breakdown of one host machine might breakdown 10 guest-VM too, I really get scared about that scenario and I want to do the right thing before its too late. Regarding the workflow, I hope that still cloning variant, particular VM's from a generel "template" VM will still be easily possible. Usually I use only one particular VM at a time, for lets say VM-Delphi, VM-WebDev, VM-VisualStudio, VM-TestEnv, ... so clones from one template VM was no problem in the past. On one host machine I think that should be OK, since all the VM's relate to the same certificates set on that host machine ( at least I hope so ). If I have a few VM's related to one host in that way, what happens if the host breaks down completely, How do I prepare to be able to move quick and fast to a new machine then ? I think backup of a VM must always contain the VM-image plus its VM-TPM-Certificate then, to be able to restore it. On the Mac it seems that its possible to copy the KeyChain-Bundle as collection, like in my link above, which could be exchanged between different Mac's. Maybe I should bundle all the TPM certificates to that single bundle in advance and backup this bundle. That looks like a possible, clean way under Macos-Parallels, I'm not sure how it might look under Macos-VmWare or under Windows-VmWare hosts. From yur example under Windows it is called "Shielded VM Certificates", which is maybe the way to use this under Windows. Anyway, I see no way to exchange VM's interoperably between different hosts structures in the future, like moving from Macos-VmWare to Windows-VmWare or into the VmWare-Cloud and vice-versa. To be honest, I never really used that feature aside testing it, but it was always good to have it.

Me neither But I think it should be fairly simple to get the Python4Delphi bridge running and to understand the basics, while I assume that on the python side you may choose from a bunch of different Voronoi library incarnations for testing. To call such voronoi functions should be similar in each case, if you have the boilerplate code running.

Have you considered Python4Delphi, I would assume that Python has all the modern libraries easily available.

You can try to create a new, empty app in XCode, with same bundleId net.mustangpeak.LccThrottleApp, and try to set up the provisioning profiles for debug and release from there. Usually XCode is able to set up the provisioning right and at least can give some more useful hints if not. Sometimes older or several, duplicated certificates were in the KeyChain Access, which need a clean up before installing the new ones. If XCode can build and run an app then usually its OK for Delphi too.