Sign in Join

Live chat for Free Pascal, Lazarus, Delphi and every Pascal programmer.

Mailing lists / fpc-devel / 2008-11

wrong rtti default value in the fixes_2_2 branch (dont know about trunk)

8 messages · 3 people · –

Reply by email Subscribe to this list Your subscription

Read-only archive. Use j and k to move between messages.

Paul Ishenin

Hello, FPC developers' list

Here is a small example attached which shows that rtti return wrong default values for properties derived from ancestor.

Please fix it - our object inspector dont like such behavior :)

Best regards,
Paul Ishenin.

Reply by email

Jonas Maebe
to Paul Ishenin
Paul Ishenin wrote
Here is a small example attached which shows that rtti return wrong default values for properties derived from ancestor. Please fix it - our object inspector dont like such behavior :)

Please submit a bug report. I guess it's probably caused by the merge of r11682.

Jonas

Reply by email

Michael Van Canneyt
to Jonas Maebe
Jonas Maebe wrote 10 lines
On 15 Nov 2008, at 09:29, Paul Ishenin wrote: >Here is a small example attached which shows that rtti return wrong default >values for properties derived from ancestor. > >Please fix it - our object inspector dont like such behavior :) Please submit a bug report. I guess it's probably caused by the merge of r11682.

No, because the bug also exists in trunk.

Michael.

Reply by email

Michael Van Canneyt
to Michael Van Canneyt
Michael Van Canneyt wrote 16 lines
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008, Jonas Maebe wrote: > > On 15 Nov 2008, at 09:29, Paul Ishenin wrote: > > >Here is a small example attached which shows that rtti return wrong default > >values for properties derived from ancestor. > > > >Please fix it - our object inspector dont like such behavior :) > > Please submit a bug report. I guess it's probably caused by the merge of > r11682. No, because the bug also exists in trunk.

I fixed the bug in trunk. Please do some tests in Lazarus with the 12114 revision of the compiler. If all works still OK and the testsuites don't give any regressions, I'll merge it to the fix branch.

Michael.

Reply by email

Paul Ishenin
to Michael Van Canneyt
Michael Van Canneyt wrote
I fixed the bug in trunk. Please do some tests in Lazarus with the 12114 revision of the compiler. If all works still OK and the testsuites don't give any regressions, I'll merge it to the fix branch.

Thanks. Much better now.

Best regards,
Paul Ishenin.

Reply by email

Paul Ishenin
to Michael Van Canneyt: I fixed the bug in trunk. Please do some tests in Lazarus with the 12114 revision of the…
Michael Van Canneyt wrote
I fixed the bug in trunk. Please do some tests in Lazarus with the 12114 revision of the compiler. If all works still OK and the testsuites don't give any regressions, I'll merge it to the fix branch.

Here nothing bad happen - at least I had not note. If you have no related tracker issues then maybe you will merge your fix?

Best regards,
Paul Ishenin.

Reply by email

Michael Van Canneyt
to Paul Ishenin
Paul Ishenin wrote 7 lines
Michael Van Canneyt wrote: > I fixed the bug in trunk. Please do some tests in Lazarus with the 12114 > revision of the compiler. If all works still OK and the testsuites don't > give any regressions, I'll merge it to the fix branch. > Here nothing bad happen - at least I had not note. If you have no related tracker issues then maybe you will merge your fix?

I will do so tonight.

Michael.

Reply by email

Michael Van Canneyt
to Paul Ishenin: Here nothing bad happen - at least I had not note. If you have no related tracker issues…
Paul Ishenin wrote 7 lines
Michael Van Canneyt wrote: > I fixed the bug in trunk. Please do some tests in Lazarus with the 12114 > revision of the compiler. If all works still OK and the testsuites don't > give any regressions, I'll merge it to the fix branch. > Here nothing bad happen - at least I had not note. If you have no related tracker issues then maybe you will merge your fix?

Merged.

Michael.

Reply by email