Lars Fosdal

What about breaking down the menu into groups? Yes, it is convenient to have everything on top level ... until it isn't. Since I don't use GExperts, my grouping suggestion is only based on menu names, not on actual functionality - so some placements may be totally wrong. File Code Librarian Code Proofreader ... Favorites Open Project Backup ... Class Browser Dependencies Source Export Component Copy Names Find Reference Grid ... Hide / Show Non.-Visual Rename Replace Select Set FocusControl Set Tab Order ... To Code Editor Bookmarks Comment Empty Code Blocks Clipboard History Experts Focus Go to Grep Next Item Previous Item Results Search ... Macro Library Playback Record Start/Stop Tools Ascii Chart IDE Menu Shortcuts... Keyboard Shortcuts Message Dialog PE Information To Do List -- Configuration About Window Add Dock Window Reselect Desktop

For some reason, many of the programmers I know have various degrees of dyslexia - which leads me to mentally auto-correct the misspellings I find, and in many cases, leave them as is. Usually, changing the spelling leads to something unpleasant happening, such as a mismatch between stream content and object property, DB field names, etc.

Early return benefits: The contract clauses of the method are clearly defined at the top of the method code. If you made it past the contract clauses, your code is safe to run You can easily add or remove contract clauses without breaking the code (or having to add yet another layer of indentation) I used to be a nester, but I evolved.

@Mike Torrettinni I updated the gist at https://gist.github.com/LarsFosdal/f8a3e2a7caa5e541e4c04f10dfdfcfff with an extra Analyze function that writes a clearer breakdown of the parsing. and added your example and a modified version of it to the test app. As far as I can tell, it works as expected? Your example: /strings="String A, StringB,StringC, String D and E"' is a single string param. The test output: Parse(' /strings="String A, StringB,StringC, String D and E"') 1 Switch[/] Option[strings] Flag[=] Values["String A, StringB,StringC, String D and E"] AsString('strings'): String A, StringB,StringC, String D and E ClientIdentifier = My modification of your example: /strings=(String A, StringB,StringC, String D and E) is an array of strings. Note the use of parenthesis to indicate multiple arguments. Parse(' /strings=(String A, StringB,StringC, String D and E)') 1 Switch[/] Option[strings] Flag[=] Values[("String A";StringB;StringC;"String D and E")] AsString('strings'): String A ClientIdentifier =

Every request needs evaluation to understand WHY the request is being raised, and if the request actually is what the customer needs - or if he is just attempting to scratch an itch instead of curing the cause of the itch.

TList<T>.Pack( function (const L, R: T): Boolean begin Result := (L.Condition); end);

Did the refactor solve your "always same I" problem?

Nope. F5 or Ctrl-R and the visual error remains, and I still can't edit the post again.

Is it about the pitfalls of variable captures? The simplest solution to that is to simply divide and conquer. Also - the queuing code you wrote, will only do five scrapings since you never descrement nCount when a task completes, nor do you retry the loop until there are no lines not containing 'done'. procedure TForm1.QueueScraping(I, Q: Integer); Async( procedure begin Memo1.lines.add('I=' + I.ToString() + ' Q=' + Q.ToString()); GetWebContent(I); end ).Await( procedure begin Memo1.lines.add('Done I=' + I.ToString() + ' Q=' + Q.ToString()); end); end; procedure TForm1.BitBtn1Click(Sender: TObject); var I, nCount : Integer; begin I := 0; nCount := 0; for I := 1 to StringGrid.RowCount-1 do begin if StringGrid.Cells[0, I] <> 'done' then begin inc(nCount); if nCount > 5 then Break; QueueScraping(I, nCount) end; end; end;

Did you call BluetoothLE1.DiscoverServices before calling GetService? http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/Libraries/Rio/en/System.Bluetooth.TBluetoothLEDevice.GetService http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/Libraries/Rio/en/System.Bluetooth.TBluetoothLEDevice.DiscoverServices

Pessimist = Experienced optimist 😛

@rvk - My question was due to the comment in the docwiki link that explicitly mentions Firebird and Interbase. Likewise, in http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/Libraries/Rio/en/FireDAC.Comp.Client.TFDCustomConnection.Transaction - it says "Note: At the moment, this behavior applies only for InterBase and Firebird connections."

Note to @Daniel - See the above comment. The quote gets wonky after an edit, and once it is wonky, it can't be edited again.

Is it correct that the custom transactions only apply to Interbase and Firebird? I.e. for f.x. SQL Server, transaction handling would have to be in the query itself?

I prefer individually named methods instead of overloads. Optional parameters can work in some cases, but when things get really complex with a lot of variations, I use variations on the theme that @Der schöne Günther introduced. A record, an object, or an anonymous method.

Are you trying to prevent running the same app twice? https://lonewolfonline.net/prevent-multiple-instances-delphi-application-running/ https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8688078/preventing-multiple-instances-but-also-handle-the-command-line-parameters As mentioned above, FindWindow need window class names or window titles. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/winuser/nf-winuser-findwindowa Unless you want to enumerate processes to find the main window(s), calling taskkill could be an alternative. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/administration/windows-commands/taskkill

We are trying to make a habit of assigning events / config in code, and not rely on dfm / unit event handler references. Frames are indeed a great way to plugin/unplug code. Although - I have been told that Frames are not quite as desirable in FMX? Can anyone offer their experience with FMX and dynamic creation of frames?

We partly use the same model as Rollo62 does. Functionality that is shared across apps, is implemented as frames. The amount of work required to create a frame from a regular form, depends on the complexity - but quite often it is more or less just a cut and paste.

It could be BLE version / chipset dependent. That out-of-range issue is a killer, really. Not being able to do a proper recovery there is pretty darn hopeless.

Have you collected a list of devices / OS versions that have particular behaviours?

What kind of app will be hosting the ActiveX component? The future of ActiveX is a bit iffy.

Are there changes to the theme resources since 10.3.0?

What about https://github.com/RRUZ/delphi-ide-theme-editor ?

What if you call Inherited before drawing the rect? I see that in some of my code I only do my custom drawing if State = [].

Have you tried without the lock/unlock? You are after all already inside a grid on draw event. A possible workaround could be to do an invalidate on the grid after a drag/drop. Also - how a mod 2 = 0 can draw every three rows, is a bit of a mystery 😉