Rollo62

But you would be in "Delphi Heaven", not "DLL Hell".

Include files I like to use separation in clear defined units, something like this. That needs some kind of discipline, I'm not always that strict, but I would prefer such separation over cluttering one unit with a lot of includes Just roughly scribbled the code like that: unit MyUnit.Intf; interface Uses {$if DEFINED ( windows )} MyUnit.Intf.Win; type TMyUnit = MyUnit.Intf.Win.TMyUnit; {$ELSEIF DEFINED( linux ) } MyUnit.Intf.Linux; type TMyUnit = MyUnit.Intf.Linux.TMyUnit; {$ELSEIF DEFINED( macos ) } MyUnit.Intf.Macos; type TMyUnit = MyUnit.Intf.MAcos.TMyUnit; {$else} {$MESSAGE ERROR 'MyUnit.Intf: Unsupported platform' } {$endif} .... That results in two main advantages: - NO INCLUDE's needed in the underlying sub-units - a clear error message when unknown conditionals were used

1 click is fine, but I like at least to define a folder where it shall go. Yes EULA before install, but still I'm not sure about its purpose in Europe or other countries. I think this is mainly an US law thing, and everybody worldwide just copied the same behaviour, as it looks cool. I'm no lawyer, but I think in EU this doesn't make much sense anyway. If a user installs something on purpose, he is responsible, no matter if texts showed up before using it. Of course if the software formats the disk, than the manufacturer should be in focus, but I assume we talk about normal, non-critical apps for the moment, that could be installed and uninstalled with no harm. Maybe somebody has experiences from real cases, and could share this info.

Yes we all have such EULA pages. But to be honest, I don't know if this makes any legal difference, if we have it or not. Is there any known legal case, that was won or lost because of EULA or missing EULA ? Maybe in USA, such "overinformation" is needed, I don't know, but in good old Europe I doubt that. To the contrary, in EU new laws tend to ban such "read and click in a hurry" contracts, as not legal in some other cases ( not EULA ), but at least for web-pages contracts. I would assume the legal power of such EULA page is quite low (at least in EU). Instead of the EULA, I prefer to have a special, nice "welcome" page(s) in the app itself. This can be used for EULA, but also for all other setup requirements. I think this is much better than InnoSetup ever could be, so why not using such an app self-setup welcome page, and leave the setup minimal ?

Yes include files will work. But be aware of that precompiled units will break easily, when making changes the include file, which will lead to nasty errors. So this kind of unit + "include" should be always re-compiled.

The marketing of D11 claims that it has the latest billing service, if that is what you need, but I haven't checked if its working.

Thanks for the update, very good to hear that FMX cross platform support is coming closer. Do you have plans/roadmap to support all available platforms Android, iOS, Macos 32, Macos 64, Macos ARM, Win32, Win64, Linux ? In the current version, why is there no Macos 64 support, are there technical problems that prevent to go there ? Does the Macos 32 use maybe OS drivers, which are available on the platform, or do we have to add extra static/dynamic libraries for that ?

Ok, thats an explanation. BTW: I have found this nice article from Paolo, maybe thats helpful too http://blog.paolorossi.net/2017/04/27/jwt-authentication-with-delphi/ I think it was planned to part 3-of-3, and part-4 came later: http://blog.paolorossi.net/2019/07/15/jwt-authentication-with-delphi-part-4/ I've noticed this only later, when appearing in DelphiMagazine, so maybe I should monitor Paolo's blog more often 🙂 http://www.delphimagazine.com/2019/07/16/jwt-authentication-with-delphi-part-4/

Hi there, so far I have not considered GitHub as an OAuth service provider, also usable for external, productive apps, but this rough idea came always into my mind since some time. So I wanted to check now if and how that could be possible. The info about terms and conditions is a little unclear to me, about that OAuth Application from GitHub: https://docs.github.com/en/developers/apps/building-oauth-apps/creating-an-oauth-app https://membrane-soa.org/service-proxy-doc/4.2/oauth2-github.htm https://docs.readme.com/docs/setting-up-github-oauth I assume that a GitHub account >= Pro, can be used as a normal OAuth-Service provider, also for external apps not hosted on GitHub itself. Since I cannot find a lot information about these terms, I am very unsure if this is a good idea, or recommended only for development purposes. Who is using such already in productive applications ? What I can see that GitHub allows up to 100 OAuth services, and I see no difference especially for development or production. Are there special hidden costs, when using this productive, or is this all in the flat cost of the account ( which would starting from a Pro account at 4 USD/month, including up to 100 OAuth applications ) ? Are there special terms that forbid such kind of usage, outside the scope of GitHub projects ? Are there any technical restrictions that may bite me in a productive system ( any resources/packages occupied per app, performance, access limits, transfer limits, or the like ) ? If that is all OK, I think this would mean that GitHub is a very cost effective OAuth provider, only I cannot really believe that. Maybe somebody here has experiences with using GitHub as service provider, and would like to give some tips and and share recommendations ?

Ok, I see. Yes, it should be it, but stange that the issuer name is in the list below, but not the issuer key. I thought that several Issuers could be possible, it looks like there can be only one, or is it different for the currently logged in user ? I would have expected this issuer key near to the key's issuer name in the list below.

Yes, I think its just kind of access-token, and Apple recommends also a quite short lifetime < 20min for the token, to be accepted. By the way, I think all this is still beta probably, and I know Apple for changing a lot when its about improving security 🙂

Yes, this was also my first thought, but I have checked that the Jose JWT library adds this "JWT" (uppercase) automatically. But maybe worth to doublecheck, if this stays like that also after creation. The notes about URL are interesting, but I think Apple uses this in its own way. I also thought some times to use JWT Token, to create some unique, secured data, but without URL, that should make sense too IMHO. Did you get if from the AppStoreConnect, user section ? I see all the user/roles, etc. but no such ID anywhere. The problem I see is that I have several entries there anyway, under the same "Name", probably even with different Apple-Ids. If this is from the MemberCenter/Certification section, I cannot spot it either. I would assume that this is maybe taken from a different item, not the one that Apple wants to see here. Nevertheless, Apple seems not havin explained that origin very well.

Hi Dave, how does the AIssuer looks like ? It should be like 57246542-96fe-1a63-e053-0824d011072a , but I cannot find this from the Users table or anywhere else. Where did you get this from ?

Hi there, I received my OpenAI beta test account recently, after waiting for that more than a year now. Finally I was very much excited about the AI capabilities, as I watched the amazing Youtube series of GPT3 Leta from Dr. Alan Thompson, who is experimenting with the DaVinci model and avatars to provide a real human chat experience. This machine will easily pass the turing test IMHO. Well, but when I first checked the Playground, I found the GPT3 models were not so much evolved as I expected. I also tried out the REST API, with the same disapointing outcome. GPT3 often gives completely wrong answers, mostly doesn't understand anything at all, not even a name or very basic texts, and all in all its far from capabilities of the Leta series I mentioned above. So maybe this is the case because I have not provided enough or wrong training data, but there is also no real explanation howto provide information, and especially what data would be really needed, to enable GPT3 to deliver most useful results. In the meantime during waiting for GPT3 access, I already tried GPT-J and tried others, but they all were not especially "intelligent" neither in understanding normal texts nor in providing real world answers (like: who won the latest nobel price in physics ?). Now I would say GPT3 is on a same level as GPT-J, at least when it comes to a unspecific chat application. What is Dr. Thompson's secret to make it so clever ? I assume that all GPT3 models use the same training data ( it was mentioned that training data was used only from the time until year 2018 ), so that also Dr. Thompson's machine should be using the same data. I wanted to ask if anybody here in DP had also some AI experiences, and maybe could squeeze better results out of GPT3 ? Would be great to exchange some tips and hints. howto handle AI best.

I absolutely agree, I have Alexa, Siri (only Google Assistant is more clever ), but they all are miles away from this Leta series. I am not talking about those, but the GPT3 (Leta) videos in the link above, which is in an experimental, closed beta. Are the Leta videos then a hoax finally, I dont think so ? There are about 24 videos right now, and I think Dr. Thompson is close to many AI research teams, having a deeper insight as we could have. Since GPT3 is only a textual processor, maybe the Q/A is somewhat "beautified" before sending to the avatar and speech output. But many of Leta's answers are really astonishing, and would make AI really useful.

Don't you see any use-case, I wonder ? If the a device chat can give perfect answers, like the Leta project can do, I see a lot. Just as example for assisting people in their daily worksite, in real language, maybe by a special trainned AI which is optimized to the special field of the customers current working tasks. The AI could act as a real useful assistant, giving useful tips. But that is only one of many ideas, for the others I better let you sign an NDA No not really, I think there have been already millions of people thought about the same ideas, like always if a new technology is emerging. While OpenAI, Apple, Facebook and those kind of companies ahve already filed their patents. "... increase in income ..." Not sure how you mean that, but I think: Yes, such AI gadgets in apps and software will sell veeeery well to a lot of company and private customers in the near future, if the AI can really do a good job.

Hi there, I want to wave goodbye to Delphi 10.4.2. This was for me one of the most stable versions in the past, maybe only XE8 was similar stable and less critical for me. Yes, it had its hickups here and there, but nothing too annoying at all. It accompanied me in the last 12 months as true friend, so I wish you luck in the afterlife. Looking forward to see Rx11 as stable as its older brother, and to give me another 12 months cycle of convenient Life. The start looks very promising, lets see ...

Thanks to Darian I've noted that I had missed to update my IDE version in DP for quite some time. Just updated, of course its Rx11 now, and was Rx10.4.2 before. A good time to remind everybody to check their profiles too.

Do you mean something like Anchor ?

@Darian Miller Thanks for such list, that is very helpful. Such a general "Can-I-Use" list would be a big step to more quality, but I'm afraid this will end as fulltime job. I'm not sure if preparing such useful lists could be done with Github or other tools on-the-fly, maybe so. Anyway, I think this would be a perfect community work, to prepare especially something like Delphi polyfills, to add certain "workaround" to each issue. If anybody knows how such work could be "automated", that would be great, maybe this could be even a side-project within DP ? Anyway, my recipe to avoid most issues are the following: - don't use the latest features immediately, just observe and test, but let them "stabilize" - avoid using the latest fancy hot components, like TNumberBox, just take the time to build your own from more basic components ( I highly recommend frames for this ) - try to use only minimal, absolute necessary external components, to avoid too much external bindings - modularize your libraries, so that they can be easier be managed and replaced (if needed ), single responsibility principle is also very much true for units IMHO, so I try to decouple functions into separate spaces. - tweak the Delphi core units, whereever needed, to workaround issues and to receive the desired behaviour you want to have ( record helper or interposer) - UnitTest most of your work, to be able to spot sudden changes early

I think you could bind the Tag property too, with LiveBindings. For me the whole LB thing is also still very much unclear, whats it's BestPractices are, to get best results out of it. Until now: "Handle with care"

Why, it looks OK to me. The index shows the entries from 0 ... nn, the Tag determines what item you have. If you filter, then the index might change, I think that is correct.

@mitzi Thanks a lot. This could make some backed up WinXP VMs with old XP projects obsolete, if we can compile them in current Rx11 too. Lets utilize the free'd disk-space with some new, astonishing and modern FMX project's

Simpler, yes, but the "Ex" receives also more information Especially the ItemObject is quite handy, to select the right sub-component in the TListItem, which you are interested in.

In ancient past versions I had some issues from time to time, on various platforms, not sure what the root cause of them was. Anyway, I only can say that since I moved completely to ItemClickEx I had no more issues. Maybe everything is OK now, in the last Delphi versions.