[HeDiBo]

'HeDiBo' wrote:

Which of these defines must be kept and which must be hidden. Or where can I find the versions that the module tests?

By trial and error, I found that for version 2011.2.9 the following combination of defines is needed:

Code:

//{$DEFINE VER14_1_2} // cxGrid version 14.1.2 and newer
//{$DEFINE VER13_2_2}
//{$DEFINE VER12_2_3}
{$DEFINE VER12_1_6}
//{$DEFINE VER26}
{$DEFINE VER23}
{$DEFINE VER653}
//{$DEFINE VER650}
//{$DEFINE VER645}
//{$DEFINE VER640}

That's no way obvious is it? Those version numbers don't make any sense. Or what do I not see?

Regards ;-}

Dick

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

3. Be sure that latest version of DevExpress is installed, or check a list of supported DevExpress versions in the beginning of the acLFPainter.pas file (AlphaControls)

Hi Serge,

I have DevExpress 2011.2.9

At the top of acLFPainter i find:

Code:

{$DEFINE VER14_1_2} // cxGrid version 14.1.2 and newer
{$DEFINE VER13_2_2}
{$DEFINE VER12_2_3}
{$DEFINE VER12_1_6}
{$DEFINE VER26}
{$DEFINE VER23}
{$DEFINE VER653}
{$DEFINE VER650}
{$DEFINE VER645}
{$DEFINE VER640}

Which of these defines must be kept and which must be hidden. Or where can I find the versions that the module tests?

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

Please, try latest version. I have tried it with Delphi XE4 and this package has been installed without errors.

Otherwise, can you give me a remote access to your PC?

Remember that it worked after I removed the requirement for acntDelphiXE4_R from the acntDelphiXE4 package. After that I didn't find any problems anymore. The latest version installed without a glitch too. Let's file it under “Greater Delphi Mysteries” 😛

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

You uses other own packages where acntDelphiXE4_R.bpl is required?

This is actually a fresh installation of Delphi XE4. So no other packages installed yet, apart from a previous version of AC and the packages that come standard with Delphi XE4. I totally erased every trace of AC when I tried to install version 9.03 beta. I was totally surprised that removing the requirement for the run-time package made it work. That smells like a wrong path, but I renamed every folder that contained other AC components than the one that I required 😮

'Support' wrote:

Btw. Please, keep black color of text because blue text is not very comfortable for reading.

You're absolutely right, I chose the wrong color :blush:

[HeDiBo]

At a certain moment you will try anything, even foolish things.

After cleaning every trace of AC even from the registry, and rebuilding acntDelphiXE4_R, the same trouble stayed.

I opened the acntDelphiXE4.dpk file and REMOVED the requirement for acntDelphiXE4_R !! Then I retried INSTALL and it worked!! Even without the requirement present. When I added the requirement again, it still worked! Solved, but not satisfactory at all. :punish:

I would still like some explanation. All paths where acntDelphiXE4_R could be founds were renamed, except for the one where I wanted it to be found. So, if the compiler found another version of the run-time package, I would now expect some “requirement not found” or “package not found” error.

[HeDiBo]

'mol' wrote:

There are people out there who are still trying to make a living with Delphi and AlphaControls. You're quite obviously not one of them.

You know nothing about me.

Did you pay for a lifetime license for AlphaControls too?

When did you complete your last Unix project using Delphi?

[HeDiBo]

Serge, there is a proof of concept. A complete GUI interface package that is compatible across the operating systems Lazarus is used: fpGui. Its design principles could form the basis for AlphaControls too. Of course it is nowhere near the quality and looks of AlphaControls 😛

'mol' wrote:

I'm almost certain that investing into Lazarus is a dead end financially, and for most of Serge's paying customers, taking substantial time away from further development of the Delphi version would be a slap in the face.

Maybe Serge should worry about that. It looks like you think the AlphaControls package is not complete enough to pay for it 😕

[HeDiBo]

'tomkrysl' wrote:

We will port the applications to Linux either way (just making other form files and some code hacking so we can use one source for both), but I would really appreciate making Alpha controls for Lazarus.

Of course we would pay for it.

There you have it, Serge. This customer is even willing to pay for your efforts. I told you there would be interest in AC in the Lazarus community.

Just consider it, will you?

Keep up the good work!

Vriendelijke groeten ;-}

Dick

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

This means that new library should be created, where controls are not based on Windows controls…

That's true, but the TButton from the standard library also works in all the supported environments, Windows or otherwise. Which shows that it's possible to create general components for different environments.

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

You think, this work will be paid off?

Just have a look at the list of Operating Systems / Processor combinations supported:

Code:

tsystem =
(
system_none, { 0 }
obsolete_system_i386_GO32V1,{ 1 }
system_i386_GO32V2, { 2 }
system_i386_linux, { 3 }
system_i386_OS2, { 4 }
system_i386_Win32, { 5 }
system_i386_freebsd, { 6 }
system_m68k_Amiga, { 7 }
system_m68k_Atari, { 8 }
system_m68k_Mac, { 9 }
system_m68k_linux, { 10 }
system_m68k_PalmOS, { 11 }
system_alpha_linux, { 12 }
system_powerpc_linux, { 13 }
system_powerpc_macos, { 14 }
system_i386_solaris, { 15 }
system_i386_beos, { 16 }
system_i386_netbsd, { 17 }
system_m68k_netbsd, { 18 }
system_i386_Netware, { 19 }
system_i386_qnx, { 20 }
system_i386_wdosx, { 21 }
system_sparc_solaris, { 22 }
system_sparc_linux, { 23 }
system_i386_openbsd, { 24 }
system_m68k_openbsd, { 25 }
system_x86_64_linux, { 26 }
system_powerpc_darwin, { 27 }
system_i386_EMX, { 28 }
system_powerpc_netbsd, { 29 }
system_powerpc_openbsd, { 30 }
system_arm_linux, { 31 }
system_i386_watcom, { 32 }
system_powerpc_MorphOS, { 33 }
system_x86_64_freebsd, { 34 }
system_i386_netwlibc, { 35 }
system_powerpc_Amiga, { 36 }
system_x86_64_win64, { 37 }
system_arm_wince, { 38 }
system_ia64_win64, { 39 }
system_i386_wince, { 40 }
system_x86_6432_linux, { 41 }
system_arm_gba, { 42 }
system_powerpc64_linux, { 43 }
system_i386_darwin, { 44 }
system_arm_palmos, { 45 }
system_powerpc64_darwin, { 46 }
system_arm_nds, { 47 }
system_i386_embedded, { 48 }
system_m68k_embedded, { 49 }
system_alpha_embedded, { 50 }
system_powerpc_embedded, { 51 }
system_sparc_embedded, { 52 }
system_vm_embedded, { 53 }
system_iA64_embedded, { 54 }
system_x86_64_embedded, { 55 }
system_mips_embedded, { 56 }
system_arm_embedded, { 57 }
system_powerpc64_embedded, { 58 }
system_i386_symbian, { 59 }
system_arm_symbian, { 60 }
system_x86_64_darwin, { 61 }
system_avr_embedded, { 62 }
system_i386_haiku, { 63 }
system_arm_darwin, { 64 }
system_x86_64_solaris, { 65 }
system_mipseb_linux, { 66 }
system_mipsel_linux, { 67 }
system_i386_nativent, { 68 }
system_i386_iphonesim, { 69 }
system_powerpc_wii, { 70 }
system_x86_64_openbsd, { 71 }
system_x86_64_netbsd, { 72 }
system_powerpc_aix, { 73 }
system_powerpc64_aix, { 74 }
system_jvm_java32, { 75 }
system_jvm_android32 { 76 }
);

That's a very long list, where most of these combinations, including the Windows versions, do not have a visual control package nearly as sophisticated as AlphaControls.

This page lists also a number of commercial packages: http://wiki.lazarus….d_Code_examples

TMS Software has versions of there packages for Lazarus.

So, yes, there's definitely a market for your product. Just think of the possibilities with smart phone software, with Mac OS and with all kind of Linux and Unix systems.

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

Hello HeDiBo!

I'm sorry, I was not seen your previous message (don't know why :blush:)

I will install and research the Lazarus soon.

Did you have a chance to have a look at it?

[HeDiBo]

Hi Serge,

There's already a starting interest in AlphaControls from the Lazarus community.

They are taking your work as a study object: Lazarus forum msg.

Have a look at Lazarus, please.

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

Thank you for the screenshot. Try attached file please, the issue should be solved there.

That did the trick. Thanks :a3:

Now I have a new problem, the standard dialogs do not skin properly.

But that has to do with the other problem, I wrote you about in a separate mail. My patched VCL components.

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

Most skins contain the ICOLINE section and this section used when the IcoLineSkin property is empty. So, kind of this line is depended from ICOLINE section.

I see now what you mean.

This would be appropriate if the skin selection was only one column. But with a multicolumn selection, the ICOLINE skin should be repeated as the start of every selection column. As it is now it is quite unbalanced (in selected skins the first column differs from the other columns).

Thanks ;-}

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

This property should be empty by default. 🙂

I disagree.

These are two images of the same project, using the Shine skin.

The first one is the image of the project with IcoLineSkin is empty. As you can see there's a nonfunctional blue bar to the right of the extra line (it would be functional if all selection would be preceded by this blue bar, but that's not the case).

In the second one the IcoLineSkin is MENUITEM. Now the area blends in nicely with the other menu items:

[attachment=5421:IcoLineSkinIsNone.jpg][attachment=5422:IcoLineSkinIsMenuItem.jpg]

I suggest you treat an empty IcoLineSkin as if MENUITEM was chosen.

I wish you a merry Christmas and a very good and healthy 2012 :a3:

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

I think, you just should use a truetype font, please try.

The form's font was not TrueType, but the ExtraLineFont was TrueType (Trebuchet MS).

'Support' wrote:

PS. SkinManager.MenuSupport.IcoLineSkin should not be 'EXTRALINE', I think?

Why do you not set the default skin for IcoLineSkin to MENUITEM? That prevents a lot of confusion, since that appears to be the skin of choice for this item.

I reloaded the project and low and behold: the text appeared vertically!! I didn't change anything :huh:

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

I'm sorry, some problems exists with fixing it. I hope, this issue will be solved very soon.

You did it!

Problem solved!

Well done, Serge

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

I think, something in a system gives me a different result. I'm working with this issue now.

Problem is still present in 7.55

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

Thank you very much. Maybe you uses an old version of the skin?

Can you insert a skin into Exe, please?

I did. No result. Same problem with 7.53. This is the skin used: [attachment=5230:Sand.rar]

It doesn't go wrong with all skins. It goes OK with these skins:

Air, Aluminium, Bejing Ext, Calcium, Cappuccino, Deep, Deep Purple, Karakum, Lucky, Moonlight, Nautilus, NeonNight, Saphire, Shine, Smoky, Snow Leopard, Steam, TV-b, Vienna, Vienna Ext, Vista, WEB, WEB-2, Winter2011.

All these skins have large enough borders or shadows to cover the troublesome artifacts.

Hope this helps.

Seeya ;-}

[HeDiBo]

'Support' wrote:

Could you send me your demo with Exe, please?

Here it is: [attachment=5160:FormCaption.rar]

[Author]

Posts