[Lazarus] Thread based timer vs TTimer
mschnell at lumino.de
Wed Jun 24 09:57:12 CEST 2015
On 06/23/2015 04:36 PM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> I don't use TCustomApplication anywhere in fpGUI or my applications.
> I've also never had the need for QueueAsyncCall(), sorry. ;-)
My "easy" way to do (embedded) application for headless devices (hence
obviously NopGUI) is to do the application first on a (Linux) PC
including a GUI for monitoring states and introducing stimulus events,
using a set of dedicated units for GUI stuff and another set of
dedicated units for the "business logic". In the end, the GUI units can
be replaced by noGUI workalikes with stripped-off debugging
functionality, leaving the "business logic" units untouched. So if you
face any problems with the running task, for debugging you easily can
use the GUI enabled application, again.
As such embedded application often need to communicate with multiple
partners via TCP/IP, serial interfaces etc, and need to do complex
timing, it does make sense to use threads and TTimers.
Of course a complete cross-development with cross compiling and remote
debugging (PC -> headless device) would be another decent option here.
But I have not been able to make this work. (For C based project I use
an Eclipse IDE for cross compiling and remote debugging every day.)
So IMHO, an "activeNoGUI" Widget Type that automates the process of
porting would be nice to have.
In fact all this has become less priority during the last few years, as
you rather easily at rather low additional cost you can plan your
embedded device to be GUI enable (e.g. with a BeagleBone or an Odroid).
But I e.g. needed to do software for a NAS device and here, no Graphic
was available at all.
Nonetheless I hope to be able to publish the "activeNoGUI" Widget Type
for Lazarus one day soon.
More information about the Lazarus