Hello

I whant to know, if the docs shipped with fpc 1.0.6 are the same like in the offical fpc book anvalible in stores. Make it sense to buy it, because the docs ar really "mighty" ? How big is and how deep goes the linux part of the book ? Are there also some pages about special units, like gtk, opengl or sockets etc. ?

Greetings

Karim F.

I didn't even know there was a book :P

cheers
James

The book is pretty much the shipped docs, with a more professional layout, but based on the docs of an earlier (0.99.14 IIRC) FPC version. It only documents the language and the core units.

I got a copy when it was released, and I found myself using it from time to time as a language and runtime library reference. It is simply faster in usage than using the online docs. If you really spend a lot of time using FPC, it can be a time saver, even if it doesn't go further than the ordinary docs.

to

time as a language and runtime library reference. It is simply faster in usage than using the online docs. If you really spend a lot of time using FPC, it can be a time saver, even if it doesn't go further than the

ordinary

docs.

I am thinking pretty hard about spending some time developing a documentation site, much like PHP's (www.php.net) that would document all of FreePascal. The lack of clear, usable documentation is one of the things that has kept me from using it as a production language more.

Does anyone know if any other similar efforts are under way?

Tim

The lack of clear, usable documentation is one of the things that has kept me from using it as a production language more.

You are kidding right? If you aren't then exactly what documentation are you looking at? The FPC documentation is some of the best open source documentation I have every come across. The four manuals combined can answer just about all of your FPC needs. Documentation on the FCL is in progress and somewhere in the distant future I am sure some Lazarus documentation will be available.

There may be lots of detail, but I find it cumbersome to use. Have you seen what I'm talking about on www.php.net? Every function has it's own little page with the ability for users to add comments, the whole thing is searchable, there are examples of almost every function. I'm not criticizing anyone - documentation is a huge task and I'm sure the FPC developers are busy developing, and since I'm not able to contribute much to the coding process, maybe I can help with making the documentation a little better, even if it is good now. :)

Tim

I suggest that first you look at

http://www.freepascal.org/docs-html/fcl/classes/index.html

This is the 'new' standard for the docs. It is generated from the sources directly with our new 'fpdoc' tool. We have a GUI editing tool for it, so feel free to add docs for any units in Lazarus and the FCL. We will extend the documenter a bit so it is also more suitable for documentation like the user's guide, currently it's geared towards creating reference documentation for units.

The search function will be added as soon as I have some time. The ability for users to add comments will not be added since that is not the idea of documentation. For this we have mailing lists and forums.

Michael.

I would like to seccond the suggestion as well.
I wrote my first PHP program last month - a giant LAMP project that used a completely revolutionary (as in nobody every did it like that before) database design.
The criteria I had to meet was horrendous:
Every record would have completely different fields, yet they had to be ordered and structured. Fields could repeat with different values etc. etc.
It was in short an order off create a database which can hold data without a fixed table structure, and a web frontend. I pulled it off by creating a massive database that stored all the actual values in a single field. All the other fields are meta data explaining all the known data fields (which means new fields can be created instantly) - and the GUI had the task of interacting with that database following the rules layed out in this database. I did all this in PHP because I wanted to learn the language. I literally looked up each PHP command as I needed it. I could pseudocode the whole program, but before two weeks ago, I did not even know a single php command.
The comments in the manual was a life-saver. Especially the extra examples showing the function in multiple usage situations allowing me to easilly pick the right one each time.

I think FPC would do great to implement the a similiar structure. Also it would be really nice if we could archive the mailining list into a searchable structure such as a mysql_database instead. Allowing users to do keyword searches on discussions.

Just my R0.02 worth

Ciao
A.J.

Michael Van Canneyt wrote

The search function will be added as soon as I have some time. The ability for users to add comments will not be added since that is not the idea of documentation. For this we have mailing lists and forums.

I think that this suggestion is quite good. First, the comments to the php functions contain often helpful hints and tricks. Further, suggestions and comments to the docs are very close to the contents. It's much harder to search the mailing lists and forum. I think also that such a system encourages users to comment the docs which is helpful to improve them. Maybe it's worth a try?

No.

Michael.

Michael,

I have to say I'm surprised at your flat-out rejection of an idea that has been seconded by more than one other user. No one is asking you to do anything. If you don't think it's a good idea, don't participate. Mailing lists like this exist for users like me and AJ Venter and Florian Klaempfl to come up with new ideas and discuss them as a group. Your negativity is hard for me to understand.

That aside, I believe the idea is a good one, and I know PHP very well, and I run a few UNIX servers that I can happily toss such a site on without costing me or anyone else a dime. Therefore, I plan to spend some time on the project. I don't know for sure that I'll finish it, or that it will work, or that it will benefit anyone, but at least I'm willing to contribute to the FreePascal project in a manner that I know how and am able to.

Tim

I agree with Michael, at least partially.

I don't think that a documentation like in php.net will be good for FPC main docs, however it could be a really good alternative to document the several specific APIs (OpenGL, MySQL, Win32 ...)
Although I'd preffer a code repository in the style of the old SWAG ;)

ciao, ivan

I am the webmaster of the FPC site. So if anything like that must be maintained on the FPC website, it will be by me. It's not hard to set this up initially, but maintaining it is another matter, and I have no time or wish to do so.

If you don't think it's a good idea, don't participate. Mailing lists like this exist for users like me and AJ Venter and Florian Klaempfl to come up with new ideas and discuss them as a group. Your negativity is hard for me to understand.

But I just answered 'No' to the asked question. You're free to bring up arguments, of course. However, I agree it may have sounded too 'final', so please accept my apologies if that was the case...

That aside, I believe the idea is a good one, and I know PHP very well, and I run a few UNIX servers that I can happily toss such a site on without costing me or anyone else a dime.

I disagree with your opinion, but feel free to do so, I have no problems with that.

Michael.

I have no idea what this discussion is about but I agree with Michael anyway. And IHMO I think the documentation that exists already for FPC is enough.

cheers
James

Just wondering, are there any plans for implementing multiple class inheritence in the FPC compiler? So that you can have a class that inherits from two separate ancestors, and can override or call methods contained in either of them. In most [maybe all] cases you can work around; usually by making one of your ancestor types descendent from the other [not ideal...], or implementing the shared methods twice, but multiple inheritence can occasionally be a handy feature.

example given: A "magic mirror" needing to inherit stuff from both "mirror" classes and from "magic items" objects:

type
    mirror = class
       procedure see_mirror; virtual;
       {blah..blah}
    magic_items = class
	  procedure activate_magic; virtual;
       {etc.etc}
    magic_mirror = class (mirror,magic_items)
       procedure see_mirror; override;
       procedure activate_magic; override;
	  {etc etc}
    end;

FPC (1.1 version) already implements interfaces which IMO, is a much better alternative to MI.
It is also interesting to note that FPC implements both normal interfaces (as in Java, Objective-C) and reference counted interfaces (as in COM).

cheers,
-Krish

Fpc is going to support interfaces as in Delphi. (I think they're already supported in the 1.1 version.) Interfaces turn out to be a convenient alternative to multiple inheritance. Modern object oriented languages (Delphi, Java, C#), support interfaces instead of multiple inheritance. There are several reasons for this, most of them you'll realise if you start learning C++ :). (What happens if, say B and C are classes that inherit from A, and D inherits both B and C, then D shoud have 2 copies of A... multiple inheritence is such a joy :) )

Where can I find information asto how to use Interfaces? The concept sounds VERY intresting to me. Is there any documentation?

Thank you. BQ.

try this:
http://community.borland.com/article/0,1410,27825,00.html