[Lazarus] Functions, procedures etc for using Dbase3/4 files ... what are they in Lazarus? (I used XBase1 in Delphi 5)

Peter E Williams foss.game.pascal.developer at iinet.net.au
Mon Jun 14 16:13:57 CEST 2010


On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 02:21:39PM +0200, Michael Schnell wrote:
> > That only fixes the memorymanager issue, not the fact that there are two
> > copies of RTL/FCL/LCL state.  (and VMTs for all duplicate classes etc).
> OK.
> 
> Do you suggest that the LCL that seemingly automatically is created and
> initialized in the DLL/.so in fact does work concurrently with the one
> created by the application itself ?

Yes. And I thought I told you this already several times (on lazarusforum.de)

Currently there is no acceptable way to do shared libs with FPC/Lazarus.
All is hackery/wizardry which might stop at any time.

> Say, you create an application that creates a TForm and a TTimer showing
> a counter on the form and then initializes a DLL/.so that also creates
> it's own TForm and it's own TTimer showing a counter on the DLL/.so's
> TForm, but otherwise the process and the DLL don't communicate at all.
> Do you think this application could be configured in a way that both
> TForms are shown side-by-side and can be individually moved using the
> mouse ?

I think this is not a sane scenario that is workable. People in a hurry
might mess with it now because there is nothing else, but this is not a 
supportable solution.
 
> If now the said "memory manager workaround" would allow for the DLL to
> work with the instances of the (non-GUI) user defined classes that are
> used to manage the internal "business-logic" application data, and
> synchronization issues can be taken care of by TCriticalSection (or
> whatever), this could be the way to go,

People can hack, mess and try. But there is no supportable solution there.

Knowledgable people that understand the RTL and LCL architecture can make
all kinds of hacks, but there is nothing to recommend to sb who doesn't have
that knowledgable.
 
> > And that is
> > not "easy".
> >   
> That is not required. If you suggest that it could be made working. We
> might start some testing on that behalf.

I wouldn't waste time on that. Do it well (packages) or not.




More information about the Lazarus mailing list