David Heffernan

Is it possible that you have reached the upper size limit for resources? Try removing some other forms and see if the project builds. That would strengthen this hypothesis. I can't begin to understand how you end up with 2000 forms in a single executable.

He is still going strong with the Graun!

Which part don't you know how to do? On Windows at least it's a call to CreateProcess, then close the app, and then a wait function call. Do you know how to close your app? If so all that is left is CreateProcess and a wait call.

Easy 1. Create the new process passing in the pid of the previous process. 2. Close the previous process. 3. When the new process starts, have it wait until the previous process has terminated before it shows UI.

QC is always updated later

Nobody other than you knows where this handle comes from. For all we know you've got a simple 32/64 bit truncation error. But we can't see the relevant code.

Given that you are the only one with any code, and any ability to debug, you are best placed to investigate. My advice is to stop guessing and do some old fashioned debugging.

Well, apparently GlobalLock failed with an invalid handle. Why is that? You need to work out where Handle came from and why it is not valid.

You really want to do this in an automated way, so that you can build in a scripted fashion.

No. What was meant was that the IDE could in principle use new style RTTI to locate private declarations. But it doesn't. It still relies on old style RTTI. I see no reason to expect this to change.

Win64 anyone?

Actually, the component will be created at runtime even if its associated field is private, or indeed not existent. What happens is that the streaming framework creates the component, assigns it properties, but is unable to field a field into which to store the reference to the component.

This information is documented http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/RADStudio/Rio/en/Delphi_Compiler_Directives_(List)_Index

Hmm. Seems like an odd way to go about it. Choosing to contribute to an open source project means making a commitment. I personally wouldn't want to do that without knowing that the project will have strong leadership and values. Making a an empty box and asking people to throw stuff in it as they please isn't at all enticing.

This is environmental. The behaviour you describe is not what I encounter. We need to understand your environment and workflow.

Doesn't look like there is any code in this repo. I'm confused.

EnsureRange in the RTL, Math unit IIRC

Er, yes, I see it now!!

Obviously that cast is a bit pointless but it hardly matters

You can use the Delete function directly if you have a dynamic array. It may be easier to use TList<T> though. However you will need to handle the nested class instances. Probably the design of your record type is a bad choice because it makes the lifetime very hard to manage.

It's a bug and surely it's already reported. Have you searched QP yet? Obviously, if it is a bug, then you have to make that choice. I just did the search: https://quality.embarcadero.com/browse/RSP-21719 although I bet there are plenty of dupes

Well, you'll have to make a choice. Have the squiggles, and accept that they are wrong, or remove the squiggles. Your call.

Disable the IDE feature and rely on the compiler?

That's inevitable in a forum. If you want rigid enforcement of on topic discussion, this is definitely the wrong place. Did you submit a feature request? Without that I see little hope for this feature being implemented.

If you named your forms well, you'd be able to see from the name which one was the main form.