[lazarus] Compile freezes up ??

[Andrew Johnson]

On Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:25:47 +0200
"Mattias Gaertner: <nc-gaertnma at netcologne.de> wrote :
>
>On Tue, 22 Oct 2002 10:51:34 +0200
>"Marc Weustink" <marc.weustink at cuperus.nl> wrote:
>
> > + From: Mattias Gaertner [mailto:nc-gaertnma at netcologne.de]
> > +
> > + On Mon, 21 Oct 2002 16:41:12 +0200
> > + Marc Weustink <marc at dommelstein.net> wrote:
> > +
> > + > At 15:48 21-10-2002 +0200, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
> > + >
> > + > >The interdependent units:
> > + > >There are a lot of circles in the LCL, inherited from the VCL. I
> > + > >think, circles are design flaws. And I think, they can be broken
> > + > >without loosing too much compatibility. But IMO each of such
> > changes+ > >should be discussed first on this list.
> > + > >Should we begin such a discussion?
> > + >
> > + > Again ???
> > +
> > {SNIP]
> >
> > + I mean circles like: controls.pp needs menus.pp, for the only reason
> > + that it needs TPopupMenu.
> > +
> > + I don't want to ignore the old discussion, but I hope someday the
> > LCL+ will become an easy hierachy instead of the furball it is now.
> >
> > If we want to have a LCL that is more or less compatible with the VCL,
> > I don't see a solution to your given example. Sure, one can avoid this
> > with Interfaces (non't know if abstract calles would help here). But
> > then we are designing a complete new component library.
>
>That's why we should discuss each point. You are right; every change
>will break a little compatibility. But I hope we will find solutions to
>minimize incompatibility.
>
>For example menus.pp <-> controls.pp.
>- menus.pp includes controls.pp in the implementation section. In the
>LCL you can simply comment this out. Do we need this for some not
>implemented features?
>- menus.pp includes forms.pp in the implementation section, which uses
>controls.pp. TMenu.Destroy needs TCustomForm to unlink. We could add a
>OnUnparentMenu event to TMenu, which is set by the parent form to handle
>this in forms.pp.
>

Menu's..back before they were started to be implemented properly, were based 
on TWinControl. I think this is why the uneeded uses. It is probably just a 
little left over include on account of that.

TMenu.Destroy needs TCustomForm... why again? Okay.. I see the need. But I 
think I agree on this one. Though I am not certain about the needed extra 
property(yet).

Andrew

_________________________________________________________________
Unlimited Internet access for only $21.95/month.  Try MSN! 
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/2monthsfree.asp