Jump to content

Bill Meyer

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    652

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Posts posted by Bill Meyer

  2. Posted

    3 minutes ago, Anders Melander said:

    Okay. But just so you know, it is possible to do without any visual artifacts - but you need to do few things to get it to work.

    That would be great. I have some two dozen forms which are affected in this way, and would prefer to keep things relatively simple.

  3. Posted

    5 minutes ago, Anders Melander said:

    Why shouldn't it be done?

    First, I suppose because Delphi help warns against it. But based on observation, it seems to be responsible for the appearance of an empty form, followed later by the populated form, down and to the right from the empty one. Looks sloppy.

  4. Posted

    I have a substantial collection of forms which may be changed from fsNormal to fsMDIChild at runtime. Not my doing, but my inheritance. Yes, it is wrong and should not be done. But I wonder whether there is a way to minimize the unpleasant artifacts....

     

    The right way, I suppose, is to produce from each form a frame which contains the functionality, then create two forms, one fsNormal, the other fsMDIChild, as hosts for each of these frames. Eventually, I will go down that path, but still hope for a tolerable short-term approach.

  6. Posted

    2 minutes ago, Remy Lebeau said:

    Design-time code (property editors, component editors, IDE wizards, etc) are simply not allowed in runtime executables, period.  So, your home-grown component needs to be implemented in a runtime-only package, and any code that relies on the DesignIDE package needs to be implemented in a designtime-only package that "requires" the runtime-only package.  Your component should have no concept of design-time whatsoever (outside of things like the csDesigning flag in its ComponentState property, the CM_DESIGNHITTEST message, etc).  If that is not the case, then the component is not architectured properly.

    Thanks. I am getting there. 

  7. Posted · Edited by Bill Meyer

    13 minutes ago, Lajos Juhász said:

    This should fail for exe as since Delphi 7 it can be only used in packages or dlls not executables.

    In that case, the dependency on DesignIde must be eliminated completely, not merely isolated to the realm of the component in question. If my understanding of the issue is correct. Or is this the issue which requires the separation of run time and design time component packages? I suppose that must be the real issue here.

  8. Posted · Edited by Bill Meyer

    3 minutes ago, David Heffernan said:

    You've probably answered the question yourself. DesignIde brings the others with it. Now your exe will link to different instances of rtl and vcl I think. Statically linked rather than runtime packages. Which might be a problem.

     

    Solution likely to involve getting rid of dependency on DesignIde. 

    One might (foolishly) think that in the help article which explains using -LUDesignIde some mention could have been made of the consequence. Thanks.

    • Like 1

  9. Posted

    30 minutes ago, Uwe Raabe said:

    What baffles me is the appearance of designide in the used packages list. That one is supposed to be used in design time packages only.

    It is added in the options with -LUDesignIde because of a home-grown component which requires the app to reference the DesignEditors unit. More than that, I can't explain, as I am too far out of my element there.

  10. Posted

    I have a large project I am moving from D2007 to Tokyo. I have reached the point of putting an executable up on a server for QA to exercise, and learned then that it requires the deployment of a number of BPLs.

    BPL_options.thumb.png.f3dc7e68714320870b216b535ea823b3.png

    As far as I understand it, these settings should make that unnecessary, However, after building, I see this:

    BPL_List.png.baa14b51482c5a12a138ee3230e35273.png

     

    Any guaranteed solution for the problem?

  11. Posted

    14 hours ago, David Schwartz said:

    Kinda like printing a bunch of stickers and then putting them on each page in the same place (eg., vertically in the left margin)

    So the numbers are not specific to the page(s)?

     

    Affinity Publisher https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/publisher/ is an inexpensive tool which can edit a PDF and you could put the ID numbers into what they call master pages. That would remove the need for editing all the pages.

  12. Posted

    19 minutes ago, Mike Torrettinni said:

    No improvement in W11?

    I thought that was such a cool idea, shared office files, but I switched it off very quickly, on W10. Unreliable, kept complaining it's offline and can't connect. Shame.

    Don't know. I should have mentioned I am not spending time on W11. We've only just updated production VMs to W10.

  13. Posted

    And here we are... another Windows with eye candy, but I wonder how many of the broken basics have been repaired.

    - MS Teams statuses are all but useless, as the update process is unreliable, at best.

    - MS Outlook instances seem to insist on maintaining individual statuses, so when all email has been read read in one instance, another instance shows unread mail.

    - MS Office shared docs are dicey, as the status synchronization there also is poor.

    - OneDrive? Don't get me started.

    I'm sure we all have Windows issues we simply learned to tolerate. 

  15. Posted

    4 minutes ago, david_navigator said:

    Just my UI. The customer currently uses Google sheets as the UI and then copies data in to various other apps etc. They're after a similar UI, but with everything else automated. I've looked at various UI ideas and I too have come to the conclusion that for this particular task the excel feel is the best for the job. The solution doesn't need to be able to export in to excel or google sheets format and must be completely self contained i.e not just an automation of excel or sheets.

    Then from my own experience, I would say you will have to work up your own solution. The DevExpress component is almost certainly the most full-featured of what you will find in the marketplace.

    • Like 1

  16. Posted

    2 hours ago, david_navigator said:

    Hi

    Has anyone come across a grid/spreadsheet component that will allow the developer to "attach" an Object to a cell (or even something as mundane as a tag), but has all the inbuilt functionality of basic excel such as inserting/deleting cells/rows/columns and allowing a range of cells to be selected and cut/copy and pasted elsewhere, grouping rows and allowing them to be expanded/collaspsed etc ?

    The Devex Spreadsheet does everything except for allowing any data to be attached to a cell 😞

    Perhaps by including "grid" in your post you have confused the issue. From the thread so far, I think you want:
    - a visual component which has Excel I/O capabilities

    - in particular, the ability to have the cell linked to an object of some sort.

     

    Since I do not know the answer myself, does Excel support the attached object? Or is that simply something you need in your UI?

    If the latter, then you may find looking at TMS FlexCel useful. It is a very capable Excel interface I have used for several years. I think you will find you need a hybrid solution to meet your requirements.

  18. Posted

    10 minutes ago, Mike Torrettinni said:

    I just don't get it. 

    Have you looked at this? https://delphiprogrammingdiary.blogspot.com/2018/09/unit-testing-by-using-dunit-in-delphi.html

     

    DUnit was the first unit test base for Delphi. DUnitX came later, and I think you will find the articles on DUnit are a simpler starting point than those for DUnitX. Nothing wrong with DUnitX, it's just that many writers will likely assume you already use DUnit.

  19. Posted

    On 10/16/2021 at 10:04 AM, ConstantGardener said:

    from @Vincent Parrett in another thread about 10.2.4 LSP : "If the code is too complex for the tooling, then the tooling needs improving, valid compiling code should not be a problem." 

    The key phrase being "valid compiling." And even that is not without limit.

    In a large application, when the Unit Dependency Cycles (UDCs) reach some threshold, the build time begins to increase exponentially. The exponent has been, in my experience, relatively small, so things do not grind immediately to a halt. But even a 3% degradation can't be sustained -- eventually, a build takes minutes to complete. In Delphi, that is pretty shocking.

    The problem is in how to reduce the UDCs, since they derive in large measure from poor design. Reducing them is a matter of making real design repairs, and that is expensive.

     

    But if you think there is a brute force "solution" I would love to hear of it. I can readily imagine ways of obtaining more breathing space: faster CPUs, more compiler threads, more memory available for compilation. But all you get from those is a limited ability to delay the necessary repairs.

  20. Posted

    33 minutes ago, Dave Novo said:

    We do have too many semi-circular references. We are working on removing them slowly over time, which we thought would improve the compile time as well. But it seems not to improve the compile time very much and it takes tons of time.

    Whether it improves compile time depends on just how many Unit Dependency Cycles you have. In a large legacy project, it can be a very large number, and reducing that number can greatly help with build time. Also not, "build" not "compile". 

  24. Posted

    8 hours ago, Lars Fosdal said:

    Having a fast SSD doesn't hurt, nor does it hurt to have source and output on different drives, but I wish I could get a CPU that had a core that could be clocked really high, since the compilers mostly are single core intensive.

     

    Like a few THz? 😉

  25. Posted

    11 minutes ago, Darian Miller said:

    The recently released RAD Studio 11 now only offers LSP for CodeInsight (classic codeinsight has been retired) so I hope that project is now considered 'done' and I would also hope that a new code formatter is on deck.

    I think you have the relationship reversed, and meant to write that CodeInsight is only operative with LSP. 

    As reported above, the problem is present in RAD Studio 11. No doubt that is why the case cited is marked "unresolved."

×