I hadn't come across this flag before and potentially have hit an issue with it:
Code: Select all
[ERROR] #Image object number is very high (over 100000), are You sure of that ?

Code: Select all
[ERROR] #Image object number is very high (over 100000), are You sure of that ?
Hi IdeasVacuum. As you know, the #PB_Compiler_EnumerationValue is a continuity flag to chain constant enumerations from a previous block. Perhaps you could check the assigned constant values with Debug, or post the Enumeration block here for us to counter check on other versions/platforms.IdeasVacuum wrote:The form designer appends an Enumeration list with the flag #PB_Compiler_EnumerationValue.
I hadn't come across this flag before and potentially have hit an issue with it:Code: Select all
[ERROR] #Image object number is very high (over 100000), are You sure of that ?
Is there a way to get the last value? Let's suppose you're using a form designer and you get:TI-994A wrote:Hi IdeasVacuum. As you know, the #PB_Compiler_EnumerationValue is a continuity flag to chain constant enumerations from a previous block. Perhaps you could check the assigned constant values with Debug, or post the Enumeration block here for us to counter check on other versions/platforms.IdeasVacuum wrote:The form designer appends an Enumeration list with the flag #PB_Compiler_EnumerationValue.
I hadn't come across this flag before and potentially have hit an issue with it:Code: Select all
[ERROR] #Image object number is very high (over 100000), are You sure of that ?
Thanks.
I didn't know that, but if that is the case, perhaps it shouldn't be assigned to an Enumeration block if there is only one block? Any how, I simply removed the flag and all is well.#PB_Compiler_EnumerationValue is a continuity flag to chain constant enumerations from a previous block
I can't think of a better way, though.ts-soft wrote:@Polo
but is not the best way. Numerates all objectstypes in one, this waste memory.
Seriously, with the amount of memory available on machines sold in the last decade, and considering that all mainstrean OSen released in that time, have large anounts of memory and support paging, is wasting small amounts of memory for efficiency's sake really a problem?ts-soft wrote:this waste memory.
No, as it will still duplicate with the constant created outside .pbf files.ts-soft wrote:Creation of more than one window per source could help, or the option to merge some
designerfiles, to make a one output.
Please do! There's no other solutions that will take into account previously created gadget constantsts-soft wrote:I think, it is a good idea to find another solution.
The enumerations are listed in the order of windows, gadgets, menu items, images, fonts. I have an application with 31 windows, 633 gadgets, 23 images, 180 menus, and 6 fonts. If I add one more window with a menu, an ImageGadget and a TextGadget, with the way you have set up the enumerations would mean that I would be using resources for 874 windows 877 gadgets, 878 menus, 879 images, and 880 fonts. That's a total of 4388 PB resources instead of 878. That means you are wasting memory resources exponentially not linearly.Polo wrote:No, as it will still duplicate with the constant created outside .pbf files.ts-soft wrote:Creation of more than one window per source could help, or the option to merge some
designerfiles, to make a one output.
As nospam said I don't think there's so much memory wasted, too!
Fred wrote:You have to group the enum per object type for optimal performance: ie, one enum for window, one for gadget, one for toolbar etc. Using only one enum for every object will lead to holes into the internal arrays for each objects.
Fred wrote:You put evety different object in the same enumeration. While it does work, on a big program it can be unefficient. Better use an enum per object type (one for Menu, Gadget, Window etc.). Each PB library has it's own object range.