#1 Re: mORMot 1 » Lazarus 3.0.0 on win64 install » 2017-03-10 08:56:43

Hi,

  sorry didn't see your post earlier. Glad that you managed to make it work !
 
  IMNHO, the combination of Free Pascal 3.0.2 and mORMot trunk is stable ( at least for services via methods ) .

regards,

#2 Re: mORMot 1 » Lazarus 3.0.0 on win64 install » 2017-03-08 12:45:19

Hi,

hnb wrote:

It's simple: we have some DEFINE's (for example "HASINTERFACERTTI" for interfaces RTTI) which are available only in trunk/NewPascal. AFAIK when you run tests and HASINTERFACERTTI is missing mORMot has nice workarounds for missing features (some pre-generated data - see TestSQL3FPCInterfaces) but this is not the same (!). Remember that not all is covered by test (for example trunk/NewPascal has improved properties behaviors, more Delphi compatible RTTI (not in binary format, I mean here functionality), RTL, syntax and much more).

so if I understand correctly, even with those workarounds in place using fpc 3.0.2 and mORMot trunk is something you're advising against .

Am I correct ?

regards,

#3 Re: mORMot 1 » Lazarus 3.0.0 on win64 install » 2017-03-08 12:10:32

Hmm,

hnb wrote:
d.ioannidis wrote:

no need for NewPascal, mormot trunk works fine with current ...

...We have many low level details and latest stable FPC is not fully functionally with mORMot. ...

  AFAIU, ab's regression test suite is something that we can rely on and currently at least for the windows platform it reports full pass for i386 and nearly perfect ( 1 test failed ) for x86_64 . I don't understand your comment regarding "FPC is not fully functionally" if i take into account these results. Could you plz elaborate ?

regards,

PS: Congrats for free pascal svn write access wink .

#4 Re: Free Pascal Compiler » mORMot and FPC 3.0/3.1.1 » 2017-03-08 11:20:58

Hi,

vonH wrote:

Is newpascal-ccr/mORMot designed to work with stable versions of FPC, eg FPC 3.0.2 and 3.0.0? I read somewhere that it is a version of newpascal/mORMot with some fixes to allow it work on FPC 3.0.2 etc?

there is no need for special mormot version, currently I'm using mormot trunk with fpc 3.0.2 after the hard work of Alfred (AOG), see https://synopse.info/forum/viewtopic.php?id=3852 .

regards,

#5 Re: mORMot 1 » Lazarus 3.0.0 on win64 install » 2017-03-08 10:54:26

Hi,

  no need for NewPascal, mormot trunk works fine with current Official Lazarus 1.6.4 with Free Pascal 3.0.2 . And you can use the mormot git repo which has the .obj files so you don't need to download them separately .  Kudos to Alfred (AOG) for this .

regards,

PS:

i386-win32

Using mORMot 1.18.3470 FTS3
Running on Windows 10 64bit (10.0.14393) with code page 1252
TSQLite3LibraryStatic 3.17.0 with internal MM
Generated with: Free Pascal 3.0.2 compiler

Time elapsed for all tests: 87.62s
Tests performed at 3/8/2017 12:57:56

Total assertions failed for all test suits:  0 / 24,624,868
! All tests passed successfully.

Done - Press ENTER to Exit

x86_64-win64 ( there is a minor error in crypto user but i'm sure Alfred will solved it soon )

Using mORMot 1.18.3470 FTS3
Running on Windows 10 64bit (10.0.14393) with code page 1252
TSQLite3LibraryStatic 3.17.0 with internal MM
Generated with: Free Pascal 3.0.2 64 bit compiler

Time elapsed for all tests: 121.12s
Tests performed at 3/8/2017 13:04:43

Total assertions failed for all test suits:  0 / 24,605,755
! Some tests FAILED: please correct the code.

Done - Press ENTER to Exit

#6 Re: mORMot 1 » Expanded Json » 2017-02-23 10:06:41

Hi afarias,

  try with GET /root/Contact?select=*

regards,

#7 Re: Free Pascal Compiler » [Solved] One test for TSQLRecord failed » 2017-02-08 11:19:39

Hi all,

  after the amazing work from Alfred, this issue is gone.

  Using his github mORMot, all tests now are passing for i386-win32 with a vanilla FPC 3.0.1 from fixes branch ( soon to be 3.0.2 ).

  Kudos  to Alfred,

Using mORMot 1.18.3398 FTS3
Running on Windows 10 64bit (10.0.14393) with code page 1252
TSQLite3LibraryStatic 3.16.2 with internal MM
Generated with: Free Pascal 3.0.1 compiler

Time elapsed for all tests: 94.69s
Tests performed at 2/8/2017 12:54:57

Total assertions failed for all test suits:  0 / 24,607,333
! All tests passed successfully.

regards,

#8 Re: Free Pascal Compiler » [Solved] One test for TSQLRecord failed » 2017-01-18 08:57:27

Hi,

  FYI, TestSQL3 ( mormot 1.18.3330 ) with fpc 3.0.x ( fixes branch ) for i386_win32 is reporting no errors in Windows 10 .

Using mORMot 1.18.3330 FTS3
Running on Windows 10 64bit (10.0.14393) with code page 1252
TSQLite3LibraryStatic 3.16.2 with internal MM
Generated with: Free Pascal 3.0.1 compiler

Time elapsed for all tests: 56.61s
Tests performed at 1/18/2017 10:52:19

Total assertions failed for all test suits:  0 / 24,611,532
! All tests passed successfully.

thx ...

Regards,

#9 Re: Free Pascal Compiler » [Solved] Deprecated SQLite3 engine » 2017-01-14 17:52:56

Hi,

  I saw in the timeline ( https://synopse.info/fossil/info/30d9885577681482 ) that you updated to sqlite3 3.16.2 so I downloaded again the sqlite3fpc.7z and the " ... Deprecated SQLite3 engine ... " error is gone .

  Thx ...

regards,

#10 Free Pascal Compiler » [Solved] One test for TSQLRecord failed » 2017-01-12 15:15:27

d.ioannidis
Replies: 2

Hi,

  today I updated my local mormot source repo and TestSQL3 report only one failed test in TSQLrecord ( for i386 / Win32 ) :

20170112 14461256 fail  #68  stack trace API 004A3775 004A89CA 00674056 004A9A77 006A691C 00401EDD 00416A04 
20170112 14461256 fail  SynSelfTests.TTestBasicClasses(06245CA8) Basic classes: TSQLRecord "" stack trace API 004A31FE 004AA857 004A89EA 00674056 004A9A77 006A691C 00401EDD 00416A04 

For x86_64/Win64 there are more but at the moment I don't need it.

Is it something you can fix ?

Should I open a ticket ?

FPC 3.0.x ( fixes branch rev 35273), Windows 10 , TSQLLog 1.18.3310 FTS3 2017-01-12T15:05:51

Regards,

#11 Free Pascal Compiler » [Solved] Deprecated SQLite3 engine » 2017-01-12 15:02:30

d.ioannidis
Replies: 1

Hi,

  is it possible to update/upgrade the static sqlite3.obj for free pascal ?

  I'm getting "... Linked version is 3.15.2 whereas the current/expected is 3.16.0. ..." even if I download the current ( as of the date/time writing this ) sqlite3fpc.7z .

  Platform : Win10, FPC 3.0.x ( fixes branch )


Regards,

#13 Re: mORMot 1 » mORMot 1.18.2777 FPC 3.0.1 » 2016-07-11 15:25:32

ab wrote:

It is amazing to have so much interest in FPC support for mORMot those days...

Sounds like the way to go, even if most users (including me!) are still relying on Delphi as main compiler.

Well, first of all, mORMot is an amazing piece of work/code.

IMNSHO, if ( speaking for my self ) , there is a possibility to have it in my tools "arsenal" for multi platform AND multi compiler coding, then the long learning curve mORMot needs, is worth it. Time well spend.

regards,

#14 Re: mORMot 1 » mORMot 1.18.2777 FPC 3.0.1 » 2016-07-11 15:04:55

OK, will do.

In the meantime if you need me to do anything, feel free to contact me.

EDIT: wording.

#15 mORMot 1 » mORMot 1.18.2777 FPC 3.0.1 » 2016-07-11 14:55:51

d.ioannidis
Replies: 4

Hi,

  I'm having the following results when I tried the testsuite today, after i read edwinsn post  :

Using mORMot 1.18.2777 FTS3
Running on Windows 10 64bit (10.0.10586) with code page 1253
TSQLite3LibraryStatic 3.13.0 with internal MM
Generated with: Free Pascal 3.0.1 compiler

Time elapsed for all tests: 308.69s
Tests performed at 11/7/2016 17:41:06

Total assertions failed for all test suits:  54 / 21,292,541
! Some tests FAILED: please correct the code.

Done - Press ENTER to Exit

I remembering DonAlfredo said something reg. code page problem in testsuite. If it is so is there something that I can do ( directive, switch ) except installing windows 10 english locale in a VM. to test mORMot with the 3.0.x fixes branch soon to be 3.0.2 ?

Any hint's ?

#16 Re: mORMot 1 » Some findings after spent an afternoon fiddling Linux/Lazarus/mORMot » 2016-06-28 12:14:34

Ab,

this 

ab wrote:

Only "safe" and "upcoming" features would be included to the "newpascal" FPC compiler.

and this

ab wrote:

But our fork is meant to be compatible with FPC trunk - just merged sooner.


are contradicting views.

  If it is a fork, then it is a fork named "newpascal". If it is a branch for "safe" and "upcoming" features then its a freepascal branch which implies that at some moment in the future the development will continue to free pascal trunk.


ab wrote:

You have indeed a way to generate the needed RTTI as source code for a straight, plain, vanilla free FPC compiler, without the "interface RTTI" branch.
Please RTFM at http://synopse.info/files/html/Synopse% … #TITLE_639


Hey, I already informed alfred for a think or two ( http://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/ind … #msg212841 ) and guess what, this is indeed how I've done it.


FPC and mormot starting to look a very, very, very promising duo ...

EDIT: I generated the TestSQL3FPCInterfaces unit with Delphi 7, and fixed the double occurrences of the mORMotDDD unit and to add SynLog unit in the uses clause.

regards,

« Last Edit: 13-06-2016, 16:53:07 by Dimitrios Chr. Ioannidis »

So, I RTFM already ....



ab wrote:

So IMHO this should not be a showstopper at all.

Only time will tell, regarding this ....

regards,

#17 Re: mORMot 1 » Some findings after spent an afternoon fiddling Linux/Lazarus/mORMot » 2016-06-28 11:22:49

@ab

  I'm sorry that I understand the difference between using a branch in freepascal svn repository such as interfacertti and a new location under a new "brand" etc ... something to worry about.

  The last month I'm evaluating the use of mormot for my employer, for a project which will start in about 4 - 6 months from now. The only prerequisite is the use of the free pascal compiler. Not "newpascal" or Alfred's git branch. Straight, plain, vanilla free pascal compiler.

  My consern is, what about mormot end up using a feature from "newpascal", and for whatever reason fpc decline to include ?

  It's another thing to use an fpc branch in their repository for development, proof of concept, testbed, etc ( with the interaction and visibility from the free pascal developers ) and another thing to implement a feature in "newpascal" that mormot will depend and me / us end up having a "crippled" version for fpc.

  That's a showstopper for me. I thought that in the end the goal was to incorporated the features, changes to freepascal not to create another pascal variant compiler.

  Anyway, maybe I'm wrong ...

regards

#18 Re: mORMot 1 » Some findings after spent an afternoon fiddling Linux/Lazarus/mORMot » 2016-06-28 08:39:39

Hi,

  don't know if you're aware. I'm quoting a response from fpc-devel 10/6/2016  ( thread "FPC 3.0.2 release target" )...

>   Plz, think again regarding the proposition at http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=26774#c91291 . Make it a switch or a directive during fpc build or what ever, just don't let time passes by.

Since I've now merged the critical RTTI related changes from my packages branch I'll take a look at it, play with it a bit and maybe also implement a new target (m68k or Power for example to test big endian support). If there are no apparent problems I'll merge it if no other core dev objects.

@Steve: would you please change your usages of PTypeInfo to PPTypeInfo in typinfo (after you've catched up with trunk again)?

Regards,
Sven

regards,

#19 Re: mORMot 1 » Linux Odbc » 2016-06-09 12:44:43

Hi,

  IMO, you should check the FPC's odbcconnection and
odbcsql unit's for hint's on linux .

regards,

#20 Re: mORMot 1 » Some findings after spent an afternoon fiddling Linux/Lazarus/mORMot » 2016-06-03 13:27:27

Hi,

ab wrote:

@hnb
It could be indeed a good idea to maintain our own fork.
If it is not too much work!

hnb wrote:

I think we need fresh air and MORE POSITIVE energy around FPC/Pascal. Your project inspired me to many open source work (!). Today I have for "our" mormotish FPC compiler few extensions (all already works!)

IMO, forking FPC, at this time, is something that mormot doesn't need .

As Eric Raymond says in ‘Homesteading the Noosphere’ in ‘The Cathedral & the Bazaar”:

"  There is a strong social pressure against forking projects. It does not happen except under plea of dire necessity, with  much public self-justification, and requires re-naming."

Food for thought from James Dixon ( founder of Pentaho ).

Forking Protocol: Why, When, and How to Fork an Open Source Project

regards,

--
Dimitrios Chr. Ioannidis

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB