Delphi 10.4.2 first impressions

[microtronx 38]

Installation went good from 10.4.1 to 10.4.2. Only problem I had, was with third party components / packages. I.e. I had to reinstall i.e. Reportbuilder 20.04 for Sydney but now it starts without any problems.

 

Anyone using 10.4 (or 10.4.2) in production environment? We're stuck at 10.3 ...

[Lajos Juhász 293]

23 hours ago, balabuev said:

Confirmed. I can reproduce it. However in my case no stack overflow occured. IDE simply hang out (forewer) with this small popup window:

In order to get the stack overflow you've to activate the debug the IDE. Create a new empty package. In Run -> Parameters set Host application to C:\Program Files (x86)\Embarcadero\Studio\21.0\bin\bds.exe. Run and click continue for the  Debugger exception notifications. When the second instance of the IDE appear open a project and then you can see the stack overflow.

[Lars Fosdal 1791]

Open IDE, and select

File | New | Windows VCL Application - Delphi

 

  

 

Update: Problem went away when deleting an expired license.
Reported as: https://quality.embarcadero.com/browse/RSP-33104

[Lars Fosdal 1791]

@FredS Creating a new VCL project, adding your unit, and without saving the files - hovering over FormKeyDown in the implementation section - the IDE locks up.

The LSP does not show any particular activity:

The IDE seems to be running in a very tight loop in a single thread doing XML processing?

Callstack:
0, msxml6.dll!DllGetActivationFactory+0x36a1a
1, 0x6d6a9a500589a9b8
2, 0xffffffff00000000
3, 0x6d6a9a8a00641f44
4, 0x6d6a9a500588c0c8
5, 0x300000000
6, msxml6.dll!DllGetActivationFactory+0x36a1a (No unwind info)
7, msxml6.dll+0x79a8a (No unwind info)
8, msxml6.dll+0x791cb (No unwind info)
9, msxml6.dll+0x6002b (No unwind info)
10, msxml6.dll+0x3f4c0 (No unwind info)
11, rtl270.bpl!SystemIntfClear$qqrr44System%DelphiInterface$17SystemIInterface%+0x13 (No unwind info)
12, rtl270.bpl!SystemFinalizeRecord$qqrpvt1+0x111 (No unwind info)
13, rtl270.bpl!SystemTObjectCleanupInstance$qqrv+0x21 (No unwind info)
14, rtl270.bpl!SystemIntfClear$qqrr44System%DelphiInterface$17SystemIInterface%+0x13 (No unwind info)
15, rtl270.bpl!SystemFinalizeRecord$qqrpvt1+0x111 (No unwind info)
16, rtl270.bpl!SystemTObjectCleanupInstance$qqrv+0x21 (No unwind info)
17, rtl270.bpl!SystemIntfClear$qqrr44System%DelphiInterface$17SystemIInterface%+0x13 (No unwind info)
18, rtl270.bpl!SystemFinalizeRecord$qqrpvt1+0x111 (No unwind info)
19, rtl270.bpl!SystemTObjectCleanupInstance$qqrv+0x21 (No unwind info)
20, xmlrtl270.bpl!XmlXmldocTXMLNode_Release$qqsv+0xe (No unwind info)
21, rtl270.bpl!SystemIntfClear$qqrr44System%DelphiInterface$17SystemIInterface%+0x13 (No unwind info)
22, rtl270.bpl!SystemClassesTInterfaceList$bdtr$qqrv+0x13 (No unwind info)
23, rtl270.bpl!SystemIntfClear$qqrr44System%DelphiInterface$17SystemIInterface%+0x13 (No unwind info)
24, rtl270.bpl!SystemFinalizeRecord$qqrpvt1+0x111 (No unwind info)
25, rtl270.bpl!SystemTObjectCleanupInstance$qqrv+0x21 (No unwind info)
26, rtl270.bpl!SystemIntfClear$qqrr44System%DelphiInterface$17SystemIInterface%+0x13 (No unwind info)
27, rtl270.bpl!SystemFinalizeRecord$qqrpvt1+0x111 (No unwind info)
28, rtl270.bpl!SystemTObjectCleanupInstance$qqrv+0x21 (No unwind info)
29, xmlrtl270.bpl!XmlXmldocTXMLNode_Release$qqsv+0xe (No unwind info)
30, rtl270.bpl!SystemIntfClear$qqrr44System%DelphiInterface$17SystemIInterface%+0x13 (No unwind info)
31, rtl270.bpl!SystemClassesTInterfaceList$bdtr$qqrv+0x13 (No unwind info)
32, rtl270.bpl!SystemIntfClear$qqrr44System%DelphiInterface$17SystemIInterface%+0x13 (No unwind info)
33, rtl270.bpl!SystemFinalizeRecord$qqrpvt1+0x111 (No unwind info)
34, rtl270.bpl!SystemTObjectCleanupInstance$qqrv+0x21 (No unwind info)
35, rtl270.bpl!SystemIntfClear$qqrr44System%DelphiInterface$17SystemIInterface%+0x13 (No unwind info)
36, rtl270.bpl!SystemFinalizeRecord$qqrpvt1+0x111 (No unwind info)
37, rtl270.bpl!SystemTObjectCleanupInstance$qqrv+0x21 (No unwind info)
38, xmlrtl270.bpl!XmlXmldocTXMLNode_Release$qqsv+0xe (No unwind info)
39, rtl270.bpl!SystemIntfClear$qqrr44System%DelphiInterface$17SystemIInterface%+0x13 (No unwind info)
40, xmlrtl270.bpl!XmlXmldocTXMLDocument$bdtr$qqrv+0x6f (No unwind info)
41, xmlrtl270.bpl!XmlXmldocTXMLDocument_Release$qqsv+0x33 (No unwind info)
42, rtl270.bpl!SystemIntfClear$qqrr44System%DelphiInterface$17SystemIInterface%+0x13 (No unwind info)
43, IDELSP270.bpl!BaselspserverTLSPServerLSPServerCharEncoding$qqrp14SystemTObjectx20SystemUnicodeStringp22SystemClassesTStream+0xbd8 (No unwind info)
44, vcl270.bpl!VclFormsTApplicationIdle$qqrrx6tagMSG+0x13b (No unwind info)
45, vcl270.bpl!VclFormsTApplicationHandleMessage$qqrv+0x1c (No unwind info)
46, bds.exe!_dbk_fcall_wrapper+0x1234ad (No unwind info)
47, kernel32.dll!BaseThreadInitThunk+0x19 (No unwind info)
48, ntdll.dll!RtlGetAppContainerNamedObjectPath+0xe4 (No unwind info)
49, ntdll.dll!RtlGetAppContainerNamedObjectPath+0xb4 (No unwind info)
 

 

[Guest]

On 2/28/2021 at 5:52 AM, balabuev said:

type
  TFoo = TObject;
  TBar = TDictionary<Byte, Byte>;

var
  a: TFoo; // Ctrl+Click here navigates to TFoo, despite it's an alias.
  b: TBar; // Ctrl+Click here navigates to TDictionary<> in Generics.Collections unit.

 

correct observation, for sure, is not necessary "re-define" some already "defined" or woul be?

 

"TDictionary" is a class/type or not? 

 

I need say to "IDE": Look, this here, is a type/class ok? dont break me, please!!!

 

here, right-click on "TDictionary<string, string>;" or "myTipo: TMyTipo;"  go to "Generics.Collections.pas" as expected!  --> RAD Studio 10.4.2!!! 

•   TDictionary<TKey,TValue> = class(TEnumerable<TPair<TKey,TValue>>), line 768 from "unit System.Generics.Collections;"

implementation

{$R *.dfm}

uses
  Generics.Collections;

type
  TMyTipo = TDictionary<string, string>;

procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject);
var
  myTipo: TMyTipo;
begin
  myTipo := TMyTipo.Create(1);
  try
    try
      myTipo.Add('key', 'value');
      //
      ShowMessage(myTipo.Items['key']);
    except
      on E: Exception do
        ShowMessage('my error:' + sLineBreak + E.Message);
    end;
  finally
    FreeAndNil(myTipo);
  end;
end;

initialization

ReportMemoryLeaksOnShutdown := true;

finalization

end.

 

hug

Edited March 1, 2021 by Guest

[Mike Torrettinni 198]

4 hours ago, Lars Fosdal said:

Creating a new VCL project, adding your unit, and without saving the files - hovering over FormKeyDown in the implementation section - the IDE locks up.

10.4.2. looked so promising at the beginning, seems like I will wait for 10.5.

I can't event imagine how LSP would react to my projects (old, a lot of unrefactored code with beginners design).

[balabuev 102]

10 minutes ago, Mike Torrettinni said:

10.4.2. looked so promising at the beginning, seems like I will wait for 10.5.

With 10.5 whole cycle will repeats . So, 10.5.1 will be bugfull like hell, 10.5.2 - will look promising, 10.5.3 - slightly better.

Edited March 1, 2021 by balabuev

[Mike Torrettinni 198]

2 minutes ago, balabuev said:

With 10.5 whole cycle will repeats . So, 10.5.1 will be bugfull like hell, 10.5.2 - will look promising, 10.5.3 - slightly better.

I know, but this will be a few cycles after 10.2.3, so I will at least try 10.5 out! 😉 Last one I tried was 10.3 - no go.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Lars Fosdal said:

@FredS Creating a new VCL project, adding your unit, and without saving the files - hovering over FormKeyDown in the implementation section - the IDE locks up.

 

on test:

• VM with MSWindows 10 64bits - 4GB RAM and 256MB Video by VirtualBox
• RAD Studio 10.4.2 Arch
• VCL project testing "mouse over" types on unit "not saved on disk"
• summary: not error happens!!! - speed regular as expected!

 

hug

Edited March 1, 2021 by Guest

[Guest]

39 minutes ago, Mike Torrettinni said:

10.4.2. looked so promising at the beginning, seems like I will wait for 10.5.

I can't event imagine how LSP would react to my projects (old, a lot of unrefactored code with beginners design).

not error for here! all expected, same using RAD10.4.2 in my VirtualBox - as above!

 

hug

Edited March 1, 2021 by Guest

[Lars Fosdal 1791]

@Mike Torrettinni 10.4.2 is a lot better than 10.4.1 in many respects. 
These are corner cases, and I expect there will be hotfixes. 

My guess is that 10.5.0 also will have issues that needs to be hotfixed - simply because exposing the IDE and compiler to real world code will uncover things that were not caught in the testing.

 

[Daniel 417]

@emailx45 Could you try not to illustrate all of your posts with images? In many cases the plain information - in this case that you could not reproduce the error - might be enough and does not bloat the view of a topic.

[Guest]

Just now, Daniel said:

@emailx45 Could you try not to illustrate all of your posts with images? In many cases the plain information - in this case that you could not reproduce the error - might be enough and does not bloat the view of a topic.

You are the boss, I, just a subject!
Will done!

 

hug

[Mike Torrettinni 198]

6 minutes ago, Lars Fosdal said:

@Mike Torrettinni 10.4.2 is a lot better than 10.4.1 in many respects. 
These are corner cases, and I expect there will be hotfixes. 

My guess is that 10.5.0 also will have issues that needs to be hotfixed - simply because exposing the IDE and compiler to real world code will uncover things that were not caught in the testing.

 

True, eventually I want to upgrade, is just a matter of a version. I don't want to stay behind too many versions.

[Clément 148]

After using the IDE (10.4.2) for a few days, I wouldn't be fair to say it's just more stable. All the features I'm using are working, including Debug!
Most debugging problem are solved, mostly 64bits.
If you have a problem LSP you can still deactivacte it. The new LSP features are working fine for me, but it might help if one deactivate it.
For instance you can disable error insight:
 

And disable LSP:

 

Even without those items, the IDE still has enough features to justify the migration.

 

You can call me a dreamer ( or incorrigible optimist  ), but if Emb can keep that same quality ration from 10.4 ->10.4.2, it's very likely to have a good 10.5 version.
10.4.2 is a clear improvement over 10.4.x

 

(Error insight level at "Warnings and Above")

By hovering the mouse over the yellow line, the IDE shows the warning. Cool eh?

 

Edited March 1, 2021 by Clément

[Guest]

only "me" cannot "bloat" the posts with pictures and "long list of text" ... 

 

but if there was a "spoiler TAG", all would be happy. 

 

 

hug

Edited March 1, 2021 by Guest

[balabuev 102]

Even in Classic Code Insight mode IDE no longer completes the identifier when typing symbol character, like dot or open brace. 😭😭😭

[FredS 138]

7 hours ago, Lajos Juhász said:

activate the debug the IDE

Not the case here, when I first moved the cursor over I got a 'calculating..' followed by 'canceled' or maybe 'removed' then moving the cursor slightly again gives a frozen 'calculating' followed within 2 minutes by a Stack Overflow and a hard crash.

[FredS 138]

2 hours ago, emailx45 said:

not error for here!

Do you see the HelpInsight window come up, Including the Summary text?

 

This is the original method with the Remarks section removed using Ctrl+Shift+H:

Edited March 1, 2021 by FredS
added image

[Lars Fosdal 1791]

8 minutes ago, balabuev said:

Even in Classic Code Insight mode IDE no longer completes the identifier when typing symbol character, like dot or open brace. 😭😭😭

It seems likely that there are certain code patterns preventing this.

I did some random spot checks in our code, and typing partial variable name[ctrl+space] or variable[dot] produces a selection very quickly.

[balabuev 102]

10 minutes ago, Lars Fosdal said:

It seems likely that there are certain code patterns preventing this.

Hmm.. I'm testing on a clear VCL project, within a simple OnCreate event handler. Trying to type Can[vas]. Nothing special.

But, it good to know, that it works for you. Can someone else check it?

Edited March 1, 2021 by balabuev

[FredS 138]

10 minutes ago, Lars Fosdal said:

certain code patterns preventing

That is what the LSP was supposed to solve since Godzilla, No?

[Lars Fosdal 1791]

1 minute ago, FredS said:

That is what the LSP was supposed to solve since Godzilla, No?

True, but there is almost as many code variations as there are developers.

There still may be stuff out there that doesn't work.

[FredS 138]

1 minute ago, Lars Fosdal said:

code variations as there are developers

But guaranteed no more than the compiler can understand.. the rest are excuses..

[Lars Fosdal 1791]

Since I don't know the intimate details of exactly how the LSP does the analysis, I can't really be that harsh in judgement.