I am in the unpleasant situation. When one child changes its state, it calls its parent to respond to this change. In my case, the parent destroys all its children and recreates them. After that the program returns to the point, where the original caller is already de-referenced.
Although I see now, that it is a bad practice and I have to change whole philosophy, but for curiosity is it possible to stop execution on the end of routine?
This is only simple illustration:
TPerson = class(TPersistent)
private
FOnChange:TNotifyEvent;
FName:string;
published
property OnStatusChange:TNotifyEvent read FOnChange write FOnChange;
property Name:string read FName write FName;
end;
.... form declaration....
implementation
procedure TForm1.FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
begin
FPerson.OnStatusChange:=ProcessStatusChange;
end;
procedure TForm1.FormDestroy(Sender: TObject);
begin
FPerson.Free;
end;
procedure TForm1.ProcessStatusChange(Sender:TObject);
begin
btn1.free;
// and here I would like to call something like STOP
end;
procedure TForm1.btn1Click(Sender: TObject);
begin
if Assigned(FPerson.OnStatusChange) then FPerson.OnStatusChange(Self);
ShowMessage(btn1.Name); //btn1 does not exist anymore
end;
Related
to write information on the processing state to the GUI inside a tcpserver.onexecute(..) function , i used the following command sequence
ExecuteDUMMYCommand(Global_Send_Record);
BitMap_PaintImageProcess;
TThread.Synchronize(nil, BitMap_PaintImageProcess);
The code is working well on some machines, but on a few it fails. The code execution stops atTThread.Synchronize command. I guess on these machines the function call is trapped inside a deadlock
Any chance to figure out the real problem behind ?
The procedure BitMap_PaintImageProcess , here I create a Bitmap and do a lot of painting stuff , but is seems that this code is never executed ?
I try to explain the very long code and reduce to the main points , the critical thread issues are hidden in processing the bitmap inside my Bitmapprocessingclass.
This class is accessed inside the GUIProcessing procedures of my ServerMainForm which also has the INDY TCP Server component.
{--------------- CLASS DEFINITION -----------------------------}
TBitMapProcessingClass = class()
FBitmap : TBitmap;
FList : TListOfSomething;
procedure ProcessTheBitmap(....);
......
(many many functions);
procedure Init;
procedure Free;
Procedure Create;
end;
TMainform = class(TForm)
MyServer : TIdTCPServer;
aBitMaoProcessingClass : TBitMaoProcessingClass;
procedure BitMap_PaintImageProcess;
procedure BitMap_ListProcess;
.....
end;
{------------------------- Implemantation ------------------------------}
procedure TMainform.IndyTCPServer.Onexecute()
begin
.......
ExecuteDUMMYCommand(Global_Send_Record);
BitMap_PaintImageProcess;
TThread.Synchronize(nil, BitMap_PaintImageProcess);
.......
end;
procedure TMainform.BitMap_PaintImageProcess;
begin
DoSomeServerVCLStuff(....);
aBitMapProcessingClass.ProcessTheBitmap;
DoSomeServerVCLStuff(....);
end;
Having no idea what BitMap_PaintImageProcess() does in fact, I have a few suppositions:
In the TThread.Synchronize call you try to read some data from the socket/idContext, but the data is not yet available. This will block the main thread until the data becomes available. But Indy's thread that is responsible for reading from the underlying socket buffer is currently blocked by your TThread.Synchronize call in the OnExecute event i.e. deadlock occurs;
In the TThread.Synchronize call you use Application.ProcessMessages (a common mistake);
In the OnExecute event you enter a critical section. Then during the TThread.Synchronize call you try to enter the same critical section again;
You modify the GUI in the onExecute event. Because onExecute is not thread safe, accessing VCL/FM from Indy's thread could lead to unpredictable results, including random deadlocks (hard to find).
I would suggest to use MadExcept / Eurekalog. They both have options to check if the main thread is "frozen". When that happens (during the deadlock) they will show you the current call stack. Having the call stack you can figure out which function is causing the deadlock.
Regarding the posted code:
procedure TMainform.IndyTCPServer.Onexecute()
begin
.......
ExecuteDUMMYCommand(Global_Send_Record);
BitMap_PaintImageProcess; //-> You do VCL stuff in the context of Indy's thread!
TThread.Synchronize(nil, BitMap_PaintImageProcess);
end;
In the BitMap_PaintImageProcess() you call DoSomeServerVCLStuff(....). Do not forget that OnExecute is fired from Indy's thread for the current context. I.e. you modify VCL from another thread (other from the Main Thread) which is not thread safe.
On your comment:
...but here my complex TBitmap processing Class must be alive the whole
time my Server is active...
If you have only one (global) instance for image processing, then what will happen if another client connects, while you are still processing the old connection (think Parallel :) )? Your image processing class should be instantiated separately for each new connection/context. For GUI updating you can use TIdNotify descendant.
A possible solution:
type
{ tIdNotify Stuff }
TVclProc= procedure(imgClass: tMyImageProcessingClass) of object;
tIdNotifyDescendant = (tIdNotify)
protected
fImgClass: tMyImageProcessingClass;
fProc: TVclProc;
procedure DoNotify; override;
public
class procedure updateVcl(imgClass: tMyImageProcessingClass; vclProc: TVclProc);
end;
procedure tIdNotifyDescendant.DoNotify;
begin
inherited DoNotify;
FProc(fImgClass);
end;
class procedure tIdNotifyDescendant.updateVcl(imgClass: tMyImageProcessingClass; vclProc: TVclProc);
begin
with Create do
begin
fImgClass := imgClass;
fProc := vclProc;
Notify;
end;
end;
{ Indy stuff & other logic }
procedure TForm1.IdTCPServer1Connect(AContext: TIdContext);
begin
// Create your instance when the client connects
AContext.Data := tMyImageProcessingClass.Create;
end;
procedure TForm1.IdTCPServer1Disconnect(AContext: TIdContext);
begin
// Do cleanup
if assinged(AContext.Data) then
(AContext.Data as tMyImageProcessingClass).Free // Casting just for clarity
end;
procedure TForm1.IdTCPServer1Execute(AContext: TIdContext);
var
imgProcClass: tMyImageProcessingClass;
begin
imgProcClass := acontext.Data as tMyImageProcessingClass;
// Do image processing
// Notify GUI for the progress:
tIdNotifyDescendant.updateVcl(AContext.data as tMyImageProcessingClass);
end;
Tip: If you do JPEG processing and you use Draw() method have in mind this: TJPEGImage.Draw() is not thread safe
I added a few more details on my BitmapProcessingclass and the idea of a thread safe extension of the existing class...
I need the existing class u nchanged in others apps ... I need a extension inside my app with the indy server.
ONly one client my connect to one server, or he has to query the state of the server
type TBmpNotify = class(TIdNotify)
protected
FBMP: MyImageProcessingClass;
procedure DoNotify; override;
public
constructor Create(aBMP: MyImageProcessingClass);
function SetImageView(LL, UR: TPoint): Boolean;
procedure PaintBitMap;
function InitBitMap(x, y: Integer;
PixelFormat: TPixelFormat = pf24bit): Boolean;
destructor free;
end;
implementation
{ TBmpNotify }
constructor TBmpNotify.Create(aBMP: MyImageProcessingClass);
begin
// indise this class I also create
// class.TBitmap
// class.TList
// much more stuff ....
FBmp := MyImageProcessingClass.Create;
end;
procedure TBmpNotify.DoNotify;
begin
inherited;
end;
destructor TBmpNotify.free;
begin
FBmp.Free;
inherited;
end;
function TBmpNotify.InitBitMap(x, y: Integer;
PixelFormat: TPixelFormat): Boolean;
begin
// Write values to the List
// also modify TBitmap
// execution time of this function ~ 5 min
FBmp.InitBitMap(x,y,PixelFormat)
end;
procedure TBmpNotify.PaintBitMap;
begin
// much TBitmap, bitmap.canvas .... is used
// execution time of this function ~ 1 min
FBmp.PaintBitMap;
end;
function TBmpNotify.SetImageView(LL, UR: TPoint): Boolean;
begin
// this function takes about 1 min
FBmp.SetImageView(LL, UR);
end;
end.
I'm wondering if DWScript supports using a script method as an event handler for a control on a Delphi form. For example I want to link a TButton OnClick event to a method that exists in script.
I am able to do this with the RemObjects Delphi script engine by calling GetProcMethod which returns a TMethod object. I then use SetMethodProp to assign the script method to the OnClick event of a button.
procedure LinkMethod(SourceMethodName: String; Instance: TObject; ScriptMethodName: String);
var
ScriptMethod: TMethod;
begin
ScriptMethod := ScriptEngine.GetProcMethod(ScripMethodName);
SetMethodProp(Instance, SourceMethodName, ScriptMethod);
end;
I would like to do this in DWScript instead of the Rem objects script engine as it does some other stuff that I need.
I decided to go with RemObjects instead. It was the easiest to use and does what I need.
AFAIK DWScript doesn't support directly what you're trying to achieve but it could be implemented in different manner.
I'll try to post some source code how it could be implemented but you will probably need to adapt it to your needs.
First, declare a little wrapper class which should be separate for each script method:
type
TDwsMethod = class
private
FDoExecute: TNotifyEvent;
FScriptText: string;
FDws: TDelphiWebScript;
FLastResult: string;
FMethod: TMethod;
protected
procedure Execute(Sender: TObject);
public
constructor Create(const AScriptText: string); virtual;
destructor Destroy; override;
property Method: TMethod read FMethod;
property LastResult: string read FLastResult;
published
property DoExecute: TNotifyEvent read FDoExecute write FDoExecute;
end;
constructor TDwsMethod.Create(const AScriptText: string);
begin
inherited Create();
FDoExecute := Execute;
FScriptText := AScriptText;
FDws := TDelphiWebScript.Create(nil);
FMethod := GetMethodProp(Self, 'DoExecute');
end;
destructor TDwsMethod.Destroy;
begin
FDws.Free;
inherited Destroy;
end;
procedure TDwsMethod.Execute(Sender: TObject);
begin
ShowMessage('My Method executed. Value: ' + FDws.Compile(FScriptText).Execute().Result.ToString);
end;
Now we must create an instance of this class somewhere in our code (e.g. in form's create event):
procedure TMainForm.FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
begin
FDWSMethod := TDwsMethod.Create('PrintLn(100);'); //in constructor we pass script text which needs to be executed
//now we can set form's mainclick event to our DWS method
SetMethodProp(Self, 'MainClick', FDWSMethod.Method);
end;
procedure TMainForm.FormDestroy(Sender: TObject);
begin
FDWSMethod.Free;
end;
Now when we call MainClick our script is compiled and executed:
Since anonymous methods appeared in Delphi I wanted to use them in VCL components events. Obviously for backward compatibility the VCL wasn't updated, so I managed to make a simple implementation with a few caveats.
type
TNotifyEventDispatcher = class(TComponent)
protected
FClosure: TProc<TObject>;
procedure OnNotifyEvent(Sender: TObject);
public
class function Create(Owner: TComponent; const Closure: TProc<TObject>): TNotifyEvent; overload;
function Attach(const Closure: TProc<TObject>): TNotifyEvent;
end;
implementation
class function TNotifyEventDispatcher.Create(Owner: TComponent; const Closure: TProc<TObject>): TNotifyEvent;
begin
Result := TNotifyEventDispatcher.Create(Owner).Attach(Closure)
end;
function TNotifyEventDispatcher.Attach(const Closure: TProc<TObject>): TNotifyEvent;
begin
FClosure := Closure;
Result := Self.OnNotifyEvent
end;
procedure TNotifyEventDispatcher.OnNotifyEvent(Sender: TObject);
begin
if Assigned(FClosure) then
FClosure(Sender)
end;
end.
And this is how it's used for example:
procedure TForm1.FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
begin
Button1.OnClick := TNotifyEventDispatcher.Create(Self,
procedure (Sender: TObject)
begin
Self.Caption := 'DONE!'
end)
end;
Very simple I believe, there are two drawbacks:
I have to create a component to manage the lifetime of the anonymous method (I waste a bit more of memory, and it's a bit slower for the indirection, still I prefer more clear code in my applications)
I have to implement a new class (very simple) for every event signature. This one is a bit more complicated, still the VCL has very common event signatures, and for every special case when I create the class it's done forever.
What do you think of this implementation? Something to make it better?
You can take a look at my multicast event implementation in DSharp.
Then you can write code like this:
function NotifyEvent(Owner: TComponent; const Delegates: array of TProc<TObject>): TNotifyEvent; overload;
begin
Result := TEventHandler<TNotifyEvent>.Create<TProc<TObject>>(Owner, Delegates).Invoke;
end;
function NotifyEvent(Owner: TComponent; const Delegate: TProc<TObject>): TNotifyEvent; overload;
begin
Result := NotifyEvent(Owner, [Delegate]);
end;
procedure TForm1.FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
begin
Button1.OnClick := NotifyEvent(Button1, [
procedure(Sender: TObject)
begin
Caption := 'Started';
end,
procedure(Sender: TObject)
begin
if MessageDlg('Continue?', mtConfirmation, mbYesNo, 0) <> mrYes then
begin
Caption := 'Canceled';
Abort;
end;
end,
procedure(Sender: TObject)
begin
Caption := 'Finished';
end]);
end;
You could make TNotifyEventDispatcher to be a subclass of TInterfacedObject so you do not need to care about freeing it.
But to be more pragmatic one would use traditional event assignment that takes less lines of code and is supported by the IDE.
Interesting approach.
(Disclaimer: haven't checked this, but it is something to investigate): You may have to be careful though about what goes on in capturing the state of the method that "assigns" the anonymous method to the event. Capturing can be an advantage but can also have side effects you do not want. If your anonymous method needs info about the form at the time it is fired, it may end up with info at the time of its assignment. Update: apparently this is not the case, see comment by Stefan Glienke.
You do not really need different classes. Using overloading you could create different class Create functions that each take a specific signature and return the corresponding event handler and the compiler will sort it out.
Managing lifetime could be simplified if you derived from TInterfacedObject instead of TComponent. Reference counting should then take care of destroying the instance when it is no longer used by the form. Update: this does require keeping a reference to the instance somewhere in the form, or refcounting won't help as the instance will be freed immediately after assigning the notify event. You could add an extra parameter on the class Create functions to which you pass a method that the instance can useto add itself to some list of the form.
Side note: All in all though I have to agree with David in his comment on the question: it does sound like a lot of work for the "sole purpose" of using anonymous methods...
It may seem a little newbie, but I really have got problem with it. I have a form (not the main one)for getting many different data from the user and I want to pass it to a manager class for creating an object with these. The problem is that I can't have this class to use the other unit (getting circle uses) and also it doesn't have access to the manager class instance (which is in main form).
So, what shall I do? I've already considered using public variable but I have a bad feeling about it (regarding OOD patterns).
My suggestion is to decouple data from the GUI because this is causing your problem.
If you have a form which gathers data from the user then you should distinguish the data from the form(TForm).
For example, let's assume that you have some instance of TForm and a form, which is built from three fields: username, age and location. You want the user to enter those three things, but when the user closes the form, you should pass this inserted data onto some object. Form closes, it is freed, but the object persist. Then you pass this object to your manager object.
Simple example:
This is your record which will hold the data
type
TGatheredData = record
Name: String[40];
Age: Byte;
Location: String[40];
end;
Your TForm1 might have an aditional constructor:
constructor TForm1.Create(AOwner: TComponent; var GatheredData: TGatheredData );
begin
inherited Create(AOwner);
FGatheredData := GatheredData;
//you may want to deserialize GatheredData here and show the data in your form controls
end;
You call it, pass GatheredData and then your are showing your form.
Next, when closing form, you pick upd the data from the form controls.
procedure TForm1.FormClose(Sender: TObject; var Action: TCloseAction);
begin
if Self.ModalResult = mrOk then
begin
//serialize your object
FGatheredData.Name := '';//name taken from control f.e. TEdit
FGatheredData.Age := '';//name taken from control f.e. TSpinButton
FGatheredData.Location := '';//name taken from control f.e. TEdit
end;
end;
Having this record of data, you may now pass it in the same manner to your Manager object.
You decoupled data from GUI in this way, and you may easly plugin in your record to a number of different forms.
Just remember to declare your record type in external unit and use that unit in your manager unit and forms unit.
Hope this helps a little.
The "manager class" shouldn't be in either form's unit, but in its own. By separating GUI code from bussiness logic you avoid problems such like this.
[Edit: I originally put this answer in a comment, but decided to move it out into full answer. TDatamodules are too important and too common in Delphi not to emphasize them and they provide built-in easy-to-use means of seperating gui from logic and data.]
Other people have given good comments about decoupling gui from the logic and data. Surprisingly, I don't think anybody has mentioned that in Delphi TDatamodules are one main means of doing this. You put your data and logic on the Datamodule, then have both forms "use" the Datamodule to get access to its data and methods. Here is brief intro: http://delphi.about.com/od/database/l/aa101601a.htm
Both of your forms (and other forms) can access datasets or other data/datastructures that are located on/in a Datamodule unit. There should be an easy to find sample project out there illustrating the setup, since it is (or at least was) the standard way to construct Delphi apps.
If I understand your question properly then you want the manager to manage the forms (not the forms to access the manger). Right? You can't close the Main Form as if you do you close the application but you CAN Hide it. (unless you create a console app). But it poses a nice little problem :)
So... Splash form (Main Form) is:
.
.
.
uses
ManagerU;
type
TFormSplash = class(TForm)
procedure FormPaint(Sender: TObject);
procedure FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
procedure FormDestroy(Sender: TObject);
private
{ Private declarations }
public
{ Public declarations }
Manager: TManager;
end;
var
FormSplash: TFormSplash;
implementation
{$R *.dfm}
procedure TFormSplash.FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
begin
Manager := TManager.Create;
end;
procedure TFormSplash.FormDestroy(Sender: TObject);
begin
Manager.Free;
end;
procedure TFormSplash.FormPaint(Sender: TObject);
begin
if Visible then
begin
Manager.GetData(Self);
Hide;
Manager.DoDataStuff;
Close;
end;
end;
end.
DaaObject is:
unit DataObjectU;
interface
uses classes;
type TDataObject = class(TObject)
Data: string;
end;
implementation
end.
Manager is:
interface
uses DataObjectU;
type
TManager = Class(Tobject)
MyData: TDataObject;
constructor Create; virtual;
destructor Destroy; override;
procedure GetData(OwnerForm: TForm);
procedure DoDataStuff;
end;
implementation
uses DataFormU;
{ TManager }
constructor TManager.Create;
begin
inherited Create;
MyData := TDataObject.Create;
end;
destructor TManager.Destroy;
begin
MyData.Free;
inherited;
end;
procedure TManager.DoDataStuff;
begin
// do stuff with data here
end;
procedure TManager.GetData(OwnerForm: TForm);
var
MyDataForm: TDataForm;
begin
MyDataForm := TDataForm.Create(OwnerForm);
try
if MyDataForm.ShowModal = mrOK then
begin
MyData.Data := MyDataForm.Data;
end;
finally
MyDataForm.Free;
end;
end;
end.
The Dataform is:
type
TDataForm = class(TForm)
btnOK: TButton;
procedure btnOKClick(Sender: TObject);
private
function GetData: String;
{ Private declarations }
public
{ Public declarations }
MyData: TDataObject;
property Data: String read GetData;
end;
var
DataForm: TDataForm;
implementation
{$R *.dfm}
procedure TDataForm.btnOKClick(Sender: TObject);
begin
MyData := TDataObject.Create;
ModalResult := mrOk;
end;
function TDataForm.GetData: String;
begin
Result := MyData.Data;
end;
You will need to fill in the rest of the unit code and free some stuff but essentially this:
Start Program (Creates Splash)
Splash Creates the manager calls it to get data from the dataform then hides itself
calls manager to manage the data
when manager is done it then closes.
There is no other way to shut it down now except through task manager!)
Tim
To solve circular refrence error, you use that unit in implementation section.
implementation
{$R *.DFM}
Uses <Your Unit>;
end.
Having this 3 units:
FormMain
FormEdit
UnitMyClass
You create your object in FormMain and pass it to the FormEdit in a function like:
class function FormEdit.EditMyObject(AObject: TMyClass): boolean;
this function will showModal the form. The form will do the changes to the object, and finally return True if user pressed OK.
As you can see in UnitMyClass there is no reference to FormMain or FormEdit
FWIW, I did a whole presentation on this topic in a CodeRage 9 video. It can be seen here:
https://youtu.be/qqKx8fQTTfI
I've got a pretty big setup form which I'd like to populate with data from a class. so I'm doing a lot of
Edt1.text := ASettings.FirstThing;
I'd like to avoid
Edt1.onchange := nil;
Edt1.text := ASettings.FirstThing;
Edt1.onchange := edt1Onchange;
How do I change the text in a text box and sidestep the onchange event.
I have used something like changing the OnChange handler, but more often, I use a flag.
updatingFromCode := true;
Edt1.Text := ASettings.FirstThing;
updatingFromCode := false;
then
procedure TForm1.OnChange(...);
begin
if updatingFromCode then
Exit;
...
Also, rather than hardcoding the OnChange the the actual OnChange procedure, I would store the Edit control's current value, then reset it (which will work if it is not set, or if another place has changed it, etc.)
oldOnChange := Edt1.OnChange;
Edt1.OnChange := nil;
Edt1.Text := ASettings.FirstThing;
Edt1.OnChange := oldOnChange;
You might consider using an object to manage the NIL'ing of the event and restoring the previously installed event handler. It's a little dangerous to assume that the event to be restored just happens to be the one assigned at design-time/which happens to have the "name that fits" - you should always save/restore the currently assigned handler, just to be safe.
This would provide an even more re-usable utility than the SetTextWithoutOnChange() routine:
TSuspendEvent = class
private
fObject: TObject;
fEvent: String;
fHandler: TMethod;
public
constructor Create(const aObject: TObject; aEvent: String);
destructor Destroy; override;
end;
constructor TSuspendEvent.Create(const aObject: TObject; aEvent: String);
const
NILEvent : TMethod = (Code: NIL; Data: NIL);
begin
inherited Create;
fObject := aObject;
fEvent := aEvent;
fHandler := GetMethodProp(aObject, aEvent);
SetMethodProp(aObject, aEvent, NILEvent);
end;
destructor TSuspendEvent.Destroy;
begin
SetMethodProp(fObject, fEvent, fHandler);
inherited;
end;
In usage, this would look something like:
with TSuspendEvent.Create(Edit1, 'OnChange') do
try
Edit1.Text := 'Reset!';
finally
Free;
end;
For the "Thou shalt not use 'with' crowd" - by all means declare yourself an additional local variable and use that if it will help you sleep easier at night. :)
Or, to make it even more convenient to use and eliminate "with", I would make the TSuspendEvent class an interfaced object and wrap its use in a function that yielded an interface reference to it that could be allowed to "live in scope", as exemplified by my AutoFree() implementation. In fact, you could use AutoFree() as-is to manage this already:
AutoFree(TSuspendEvent.Create(Edit1, 'OnChange'));
Edit1.Text := 'Reset!';
Dsabling events for a period that extends beyond the scope of a single procedure requires more management than any helper utilities are likely to be able to provide in a generic fashion I think, at least not without also having specific means for restoring events explicitly, rather than automatically.
If you simply wrapped TSuspendEvent inside it's own interface yielding function, following the same pattern as AutoFree() you could simplify this further to:
SuspendEvent(Edit1, 'OnChange');
Edit1.Text := 'Reset!';
As a final note, I think it should be fairly easy to see how this could be quite simply extended to support suspending multiple events on an object in a single call, if required, for example:
SuspendEvent(Edit1, ['OnChange', 'OnEnter']);
As far as I know if the OnChange of your object is designed to fire when the Text property is changed you have to stick with setting the event to nil temporarly. Myself, I do it this way (in a try finally):
Edt1.onchange := nil;
try
Edt1.text := ASettings.FirstThing;
finally
Edt1.onchange := edt1Onchange;
end;
You could also do some procedure to handle it for you:
procedure SetTextWithoutOnChange(anEdit: TEdit; str: String);
var
anEvent: TNotifyEvent;
begin
anEvent := anEdit.OnChange;
anEdit.OnChange := nil;
try
anEdit.Text := str;
finally
anEdit.OnChange := anEvent;
end;
end;
I know this is an old question but I thought I would add my solution that does not involve any of the complicated procedures outlined in the previous answers in case it comes up in another search.
The problem is the onChange event itself. I don't use it at all for text fields.
remove all OnChange and use the OnExit instead and tie it to the OnKeyUp.
All Edits have a common ancestor TCustomEdit.
I generally use one method called CustomEditKeyUp and point all the edits on a form to this single method (TEdit, TLabeledEdit etc etc.)
type THack = class(TCustomEdit);
procedure TForm1.CustomeEditKeyUP(Sender: TObject; var Key: Word;
Shift: TShiftState);
begin
if (Key=VK_RETURN) and (Sender is TCustomEdit) then
{This is just to isolate the one occasion when they press the
enter but don't exit immediately}
if Assigned(THack(Sender).OnExit) then THack(Sender).OnExit(Sender);
end;
For some reason, the OnExit is private in a TCustomEdit so the Hack is needed. If you know that the edits are from a different route where the OnExit is public, cast if differently and the Hack is not necessary.
Then For each Edit control, use a specific OnExit
procedure TForm1.MyEditExit(Sender: TObject);
begin
if MyEdit.Modified then
begin
{Do Something here}
MyEdit.Modified := false;
end;
end;
If you want to change the value programmatically without it firing 'OnExit'
....
MyEdit.Text :='I've changed it'
MyEdit.Modified := false;
....
The big advantage for me is that when I am parsing the input for say a valid number, I only have to do this once when editing is completed and not for every single backspace, delete insert etc all surrounded by try except as the various formating functions error out as they don't understand spaces etc.. For database etc, the number of calls will be greatly reduced.
That's my two penneth.
Another way is by using Class Helpers introduced in Delphi 8.
http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/RADStudio/Tokyo/en/Class_and_Record_Helpers_(Delphi)
You could write:
type
TEditHelper = class helper for TEdit
public
procedure SetTextDisableOnChange(const AText: string);
end;
{ TEditHelper }
procedure TEditHelper.SetTextDisableOnChange(const AText: string);
var
OnChangeTmp: TNotifyEvent;
begin
OnChangeTmp:=OnChange;
try
OnChange:=nil;
Text:=AText;
finally
OnChange:=OnChangeTmp;
end;
end;
and then:
EditCtrl.SetTextDisableOnChange('I do not invoke OnChange!');
EditCtrl.Text:='I invoke OnChange';