Dalija Prasnikar

There is TOSVersion record in SysUtils that holds OS version information. But you cannot check for particular version by name, you need to know its build number.

You need different architecture to achieve such timing. Timer is not precise enough and even if you can make it precise, there will always be other events that will mess up your timer schedule. You need a some kind of game loop. Basically, you should not rely on timer to calculate and paint your screen, you need to trigger paint event with delta time and based on that time (elapsed from last paint) you will calculate positions and render your screen. Some starting point: https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/651/how-should-i-write-a-main-game-loop

Manual version control is an oxymoron - there is no such thing as manual version control. It is not about something working perfectly or not, it is about manual version control not working at all. All you have are backups of your code at some point in time. Nothing else.

Depending on the feature. If I need to test some general concept and/or feature is not tightly coupled with app I will make separate test project until I figure whether it will work as intended. If feature is tightly coupled with rest of the application I will create new feature branch in that app repository and start from there, even if compiling/running takes time. But, this is what we are trying to tell you, not having VCS is an issue. Because, new feature workflow highly depends on VCS. I know it may seem that learning how to use VCS takes valuable time, but you can get that time back in a week (literally).

It still does not work in 10.4

It would help if you would stick to one thread instead of posting separate topics... it is hard to track what is going on with pieces of information scattered around.

Are you calling me insane???? This is my actual code!!! 😜

LOL, it looks like fix for my code literally broke Vincent's code https://quality.embarcadero.com/browse/RSP-28761

Honestly... I don't care if compiler broke your code... they released fix for compiler bug that broke my code...

"If you can't laugh, what can you do?"

Apple Silicon is terminology used for Apple designed, ARM based chips https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Silicon

I literally just started typing same sentence. Delphi devs always complain all logic is dumped in form (event handlers), Android devs always complain all logic is dumped in Activity (Delphi form equivalent), iOs devs always complain all logic is dumped in ViewController (again Delphi form equivalent)...

I am not against evolution, but that evolution must follow some basic rules - and not all rules are Delphi specific, some common language rules also apply. If you are building a castle, you cannot go ahead and add another tower by ruining the foundations first. As far as rest of your posts is concerned, I am sorry to say, but I have hard time understanding what you want to say. Maybe it is the fact that you want to design things in different order is throwing me off course, maybe it is something else, but I cannot exactly pinpoint it.

One thing worth mentioning because you seem to take interface-class relation backwards. The whole purpose of interfaces (COM or native, or whatever) is that they are abstraction. They just define API, not the implementation. It is class that implements interface and knows about the interface, not the other way around. In other words, interface should never ever know anything about classes that implement interface and any proposals that violate that are practically useless.

Everyone please vote for Global Generics https://quality.embarcadero.com/browse/RSP-13724 So we can have type safe FreeAndNil without quirks and lies.

Maybe you will find some answers here https://dalijap.blogspot.com/2020/06/magic-behind-freeandnil.html

Just to make it clear, I am not dismissing using dictionary mapping where it fits better (if you don't have up front defined set of actions at call site), I am merely objecting to the notion that using integer tags is toy programming.

Sorry, but I don't see how if Sender is FooButton then DoFoo else if Sender is BarButton then DoBar .... Is preferable to case TComponent(Sender).Tag of TAG_FOO : DoFoo; TAG_BAR : DoBar; ... end; It also gets worse if you have several Senders that perform same task - for instance, button and menu (I know that you can have actions, but actions share same caption - not always preferable, especially in non-English environments) I am aware that you can also add dictionary and map actions that way, but then you need to maintain dictionary, its lifetime, mappings and on top of that you don't have spelled out logic in place where action happens - following code through dictionary is debugging nightmare. Mappings are mappings... you can always use wrong mapping being it integer based or not.

For stuffing in pointers and such... it is not appropriate, but for storing integer values that can later be used to determine appropriate action... why would that be wrong or used only in toy apps? In Delphi I never used Tag in toy apps knocked up in minutes, because they were pretty simple, but in more complex ones, especially with dynamic content and multiple entry points for actions, tag is the most straight forward thing to use and maintain. Also, just yesterday, I wrote a whole a lot of tag based code in native Xcode iOS application where native view also has tag property specifically used for determining which action you want to run. And there just like in Delphi you have Sender object that you can also use to determine appropriate action, but just like in Delphi code working with objects would be more convoluted and using Tag is preferred when you have to determine or change action at runtime.

Try going to to Options -> IDE - File Associations and doing Deselect All, Select All and Save. That should restore file associations for version where you have run Options dialog. In theory file associations will be reset as soon you save Options even without going to File Associations tab.

LOL... I missed that. I guess I am accustomed to uninstalling first, then cleaning up left overs before installing, so I haven't seen that dialog for a long time. It is quite possible that this option somehow got broken, after introduction of Migration Tool and unifying installers (Web and ISO) in the 10.4. Please, file bug report. Otherwise it will stay broken forever.

You can use RegEdit to remove registry key HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Embarcadero\BDS\21.0 Deleting (or renaming) that key will remove all custom settings. If possible it would be good to determine source of your problem. Do you have any IDE plugins installed in 10.3 or other 3rd party components - packages (including your own). Maybe imported settings are trying to load something incompatible. I just tried to import my settings from 10.3 again in 10.4 and everything works fine for me.

Err... that option does not exist any more. You have to use migration tool to preserve settings if you are reinstalling and updating and also for upgrading to new major version.

This might be a bug, then. I just found one similar to what you are describing IDE does not remember user color seting for source editor https://quality.embarcadero.com/browse/RSP-28754

There is new option in Options -> User Interface -> Theme Manager called Toggle style to match Windows Light and Dark mode. It is checked by default and that setting overrides any other custom settings. You need to uncheck that option before you can use custom theme settings. If you want to edit registry directly under Theme key, this new option is called ToggleTheme (DWORD) and its value should be set to 0