You can subscribe to this list here.
2001 |
Jan
(226) |
Feb
(139) |
Mar
(156) |
Apr
(95) |
May
(181) |
Jun
(166) |
Jul
(80) |
Aug
(59) |
Sep
(69) |
Oct
(83) |
Nov
(142) |
Dec
(33) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2002 |
Jan
(42) |
Feb
(91) |
Mar
(76) |
Apr
(113) |
May
(67) |
Jun
(68) |
Jul
(37) |
Aug
(41) |
Sep
(16) |
Oct
(135) |
Nov
(51) |
Dec
(21) |
2003 |
Jan
(37) |
Feb
(36) |
Mar
(37) |
Apr
(103) |
May
(68) |
Jun
(70) |
Jul
(77) |
Aug
(12) |
Sep
(9) |
Oct
(53) |
Nov
(88) |
Dec
(63) |
2004 |
Jan
(263) |
Feb
(106) |
Mar
(36) |
Apr
(21) |
May
(21) |
Jun
(34) |
Jul
(33) |
Aug
(34) |
Sep
(35) |
Oct
(21) |
Nov
(43) |
Dec
(63) |
2005 |
Jan
(28) |
Feb
(42) |
Mar
(29) |
Apr
(14) |
May
(41) |
Jun
(20) |
Jul
(65) |
Aug
(136) |
Sep
(41) |
Oct
(74) |
Nov
(34) |
Dec
(94) |
2006 |
Jan
(85) |
Feb
(94) |
Mar
(68) |
Apr
(103) |
May
(66) |
Jun
(51) |
Jul
(24) |
Aug
(56) |
Sep
(57) |
Oct
(85) |
Nov
(73) |
Dec
(68) |
2007 |
Jan
(59) |
Feb
(32) |
Mar
(13) |
Apr
(32) |
May
(36) |
Jun
(36) |
Jul
(64) |
Aug
(35) |
Sep
(19) |
Oct
(10) |
Nov
(13) |
Dec
(20) |
2008 |
Jan
(26) |
Feb
(41) |
Mar
(19) |
Apr
(24) |
May
(16) |
Jun
(33) |
Jul
(34) |
Aug
(4) |
Sep
(11) |
Oct
|
Nov
(26) |
Dec
(23) |
2009 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(21) |
Apr
(16) |
May
(13) |
Jun
(6) |
Jul
(34) |
Aug
(2) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
(7) |
Nov
(5) |
Dec
(24) |
2010 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(5) |
Mar
(6) |
Apr
(6) |
May
(14) |
Jun
(6) |
Jul
(1) |
Aug
(12) |
Sep
(10) |
Oct
(9) |
Nov
|
Dec
(2) |
2011 |
Jan
(4) |
Feb
(5) |
Mar
(30) |
Apr
(1) |
May
(2) |
Jun
(5) |
Jul
(3) |
Aug
(2) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
|
Nov
(6) |
Dec
|
2012 |
Jan
|
Feb
(10) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
(3) |
Jul
(1) |
Aug
|
Sep
(2) |
Oct
|
Nov
(2) |
Dec
(4) |
2013 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
(3) |
Mar
|
Apr
(3) |
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2014 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(1) |
May
(3) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(9) |
Nov
(7) |
Dec
|
2015 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(4) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2017 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(5) |
Dec
|
2019 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(2) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
(2) |
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
(1) |
17
(2) |
18
|
19
(1) |
20
|
21
(4) |
22
(2) |
23
(8) |
24
(1) |
25
(3) |
26
|
27
(2) |
28
(1) |
29
(2) |
30
(1) |
31
|
|
|
From: Aldo C. <da...@pe...> - 2011-03-25 11:41:46
|
On 25.03.2011 11:07, Waldemar Biernacki wrote: > Until now I rewrote my application to use the fix and first tests are really > promising. By the way, this tremendous GDI object number was due to the fact > that each label and textfield had its own font which in turn is just GDI object > and the same with background. as I just wrote in another mail, there should be no problem with fonts, because you create them explicitly. this means the same GDI object is used for all controls. only the brush is created "on-demand" for background. > Syntax of background color in Win32::GUI is little misleading (-background => > 0xffffff) as it suggests that it is simple attribute of a widget. But it is not > the case: each background is full GDI object too! Maybe - I am just > speculating - that was the fundamental reason why the background color error > raised? Who - at first sight - could see that there is a such big difference > between -background and -foreground? the difference is in the Win32 API. they allow a plain COLORREF for foreground, but only a HBRUSH for background (even if you just want a solid color, you have to create a solid brush for this). I thought it was "user friendlier" to automatically create a brush of the given color. it's just that I forgot to clean it up afterwards :-) maybe it would be a good idea to add a -backgroundbrush option, so you can pass a Win32::GUI::Brush object to it and the same GDI object will be used for all controls, as with fonts. cheers, Aldo |
From: Aldo C. <da...@pe...> - 2011-03-25 11:36:17
|
On 23.03.2011 17:12, Jeremy White wrote: > My code was only a hack:) Yes, perlud_free is the ideal place - go ahead > an commit it to CVS:) good, if I remember how to do it :-) (not using CVS anymore since years...) > There may be other objects that need deleting (fonts) and it looks like > there is a minor leak somewhere aswell... nope, with fonts you pass an already created handle, which means the GDI object is destroyed when $font (eg. the Perl object) goes out of scope. the problem occurs only with the brush, which is a GDI object created automatically when parsing windows creation options. > Does this mean you are "back for good"? I really hope so :-) I may need some time to catch up with the current shape of Win32::GUI, but I'm willing to lend a helping hand where I can. cheers, Aldo |
From: Waldemar B. <wb...@sa...> - 2011-03-25 10:08:01
|
Hi, > Cool - do some major testing with your app, and if things are still OK, the > fix (well, a version of it) will get committed to CVS. Until now I rewrote my application to use the fix and first tests are really promising. By the way, this tremendous GDI object number was due to the fact that each label and textfield had its own font which in turn is just GDI object and the same with background. Syntax of background color in Win32::GUI is little misleading (-background => 0xffffff) as it suggests that it is simple attribute of a widget. But it is not the case: each background is full GDI object too! Maybe - I am just speculating - that was the fundamental reason why the background color error raised? Who - at first sight - could see that there is a such big difference between -background and -foreground? So these two problems seems to be overcome for me and I am much more happy! > Interesting that > you are still having memory issues with 5.12. This could be another issue > within Win32::GUI that only manifests in those versions of perl... I have to check it once again. For a few days I've got such a big mess in my Perl environments so I could overlooked something. I hope to do it in this weekend. Cheers, Waldemar. |