[Lazarus] I desperately need some ideas of reducing edit, compile, debug cycle

Mattias Gaertner nc-gaertnma at netcologne.de
Sun Nov 28 14:40:08 CET 2010

On Sun, 28 Nov 2010 16:29:58 +0300
Max Vlasov <max.vlasov at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Vincent Snijders <
> vincent.snijders at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2010/11/28 Bo Berglund <bo.berglund at gmail.com>:
> > > On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:55:19 +0000, Martin <lazarus at mfriebe.de> wrote:
> > >
> > >>> 3. Design them as DLLs initially - I suspect that will bring along a
> > >>> different set of problems.
> > >>>
> > >>> Once they are well tested I can incorporate them into the main
> > >>> executables.
> > >>
> > >>Yes splitting your project into parts is a good idea. Quite simple use
> > >>packages.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Is there some automated way to include DLL:s into the main application
> > > exe file after one has finished the debugging?\
> >
> > Packages <> DLL's.
> >
> >
> Vincent, although logically you're right, technically delphi packages are
> dlls. And I suppose when finally there's a dynamic package support in fpc,
> there is no other way to implement them, at least on Windows.

Delphi packages are always dlls.
But Lazarus packages can be 
- dlls 
- OR (eventually) dlls plus some sugar for shared VMTs and mem
- OR a set of units
- OR just a set of source files

That's why you can split the compilation process of big projects in
smaller chunks under Lazarus.

> I tried to search for the principle Bo suggested. Actually every utility
> that claims just uses temporary extraction of internally packed dlls. From
> the technical point of view, there are challenges that should be solved when
> implementing (for example embedding loading and unloading routines of the
> dll), but I think that nobody did this also because of possible legal
> problems. The reason when one usually wants this is when he has no sources
> or other way to link it statically, that is the case when you use a third
> party library. If there's a way to make it an unbreakable part of the main
> exe, I'm sure there will be many complains from the authors/companies of
> dlls, not mentioning LGPL violation.
> But when the packages are dynamic finally in Lazarus, such trick will make
> no sense since one always can have them separately on the development stage
> (for time saving when linking) and for the install exe, link them together
> using fpc.

Before this thread goes into the wrong direction, please read


More information about the Lazarus mailing list