i know how to make Tstringlist onchange event , but what about Tstrings ? i dont want to use VCL like tmemo or something . can i do that ? is it possible to have this event on tstrings and do something when its changed ?
i tried to do something like this but got access violation
//on form show event
stringlist:= TStringList.Create;
stringlist.OnChange := HandleStringListChange;
//implantation
procedure TChatFo.HandleStringListChange(Sender: tObject);
begin
if stringlist.Text <> '' then
ProcessCommands(stringlist.Text);
stringlist.Clear;
end;
exception messages
Project Project1.exe raised exception class $C0000005 with message
'access violation at 0x6d40c92c: read of address 0x00000150'.
Project Project1.exe raised exception class EStringListError with
message 'List index out of bounds (5)'.
Project Project1.exe raised exception class EStringListError with
message 'List index out of bounds (5)'.
this tstringlist should work as command identifier i creat it with my thread
as example
type
TReadingThread = class(TThread)
protected
FConnection : TIdTCPConnection;
FLogResult : TStrings;
procedure Execute; override;
public
constructor Create(AConn: TIdTCPConnection; ALogResult: TStrings); reintroduce;
end;
ListeningThread := TReadingThread.Create( TCPClient, stringlist);
constructor TReadingThread.Create(AConn: TIdTCPConnection; ALogResult: TStrings);
begin
FConnection := AConn;
FLogResult := ALogResult;
inherited Create(False);
end;
procedure TReadingThread.Execute;
Var
strData : String;
begin
while not Terminated do
begin
try
strData := FConnection.IOHandler.ReadLn;
if strData <> '' then
begin
FLogResult.Add( strData );
end;
except
on E: Exception do
begin
FConnection.Disconnect(False);
if FConnection.IOHandler <> nil
then FConnection.IOHandler.InputBuffer.Clear;
Break;
end;
end;
Sleep(10);
end; // While
end;
if i use Tmemo no errors or exception happened.
We're all shooting in the dark here because you haven't provided all the relevant code. That said, the information you have provided has a lot of problems, and I can offer advice to help you solve it.
Debugging 101
Run your code through the IDE. When you get your exception, the debugger stops at the line that caused the exception.
This is usually the most important step in figuring out what went wrong. You have access to this information. Run your program and carefully look at the line that raised the error. You might be able to already figure what caused the error. If not, a other basic techniques can be applied to get more information:
Get values of objects and variables on the error line and other close lines. You can hover your mouse cursor to get tool-tips, or press Ctrl + F7.
You can examine the call stack of lines leading to the one that caused the error by double-clicking the previous line in the call-stack.
Put a breakpoint on the line before the error and re-run the app. The debugger will stop on that line and give you a chance to check values as explained earlier, but before the error happens.
Asking for help 101
Getting help from people is much more effective when you give them all the relevant information. For a start, the line of code where the access violation occurs would be extremely useful.... Tell us!
Give us real code.
Saying "I tried to do something like this" is not particularly useful. Please copy and paste exactly what you tried. If your code is different, your mistake might no longer be there.
Access Violations
You get an access violation in the following situations:
You forgot to create the object you want to use or didn't assign it to the appropriate variable.
You created the object but Destroyed or Freed it already before trying to use it again.
You changed the variable that was referencing the object.
You performed a 'hard-cast' (or unchecked typecast) from one type to an incompatible type.
The above are the basics. There some variations, and a few special edge cases, but these account for the vast majority of mistakes.
So using the above, that's what you need to check. If you had copy-pasted more of your code, we might be able to see what you did wrong.
NOTE: One shot-in-the-dark possibility is that you are destroying your string list in the wrong place. And perhaps the memo works because as a component dropped on the form, you're not trying to destroy it.
Stack overflow
Let's examine what happens in your OnChange event when for example a string is added:
The event fires.
Text is not empty.
So you call ProcessCommands
You then call Clear
The the end of Clear, Changed is called again.
Which fires your event again.
This time Text is empty, so you won't call ProcessCommands
But you do try to Clear the string list again...
This could go on forever; well at least until the call-stack runs out of space and you get a stack-overflow error.
Saved by the bell
The only reason you don't get a stack overflow is because Clear doesn't do anything if the string list is empty:
procedure TStringList.Clear;
begin
if FCount <> 0 then //You're lucky these 2 lines stop your stack-overflow
begin
...
FCount := 0; //You're lucky these 2 lines stop your stack-overflow
SetCapacity(0);
Changed;
end;
end;
I suggest you rethink how to solve you problem because code that leads to unintentional recursion is going to make your life difficult.
Working with threads
You really need to get a handle on the basics of programming before trying to work with threads. Multi-threaded programming throws in a huge amount of complexity.
I can already see a huge possibility of one potential mistake. (Though it depends what you're doing inside ProcessCommands.)
You modify your string list in the context of a thread.
This means your OnChange event handler also fires in the context of the thread. (The fact it's implemented on the form is irrelevant.)
If your ProcessCommands method does anything that requires it to operate on the main thread, you're going to encounter problems.
As a final consideration, I've noted quite a few beginner programmers completely miss the point that code starting a thread can finish before the thread does. E.g. (Going back to the topic on Access Violations.): If you're destroying your string list soon after creating your thread, your thread could suddenly throw an access violation when the object it had earlier is suddenly gone.
The likely explanation for your error is that you are modifying the list in its OnChange event handler. That is simply not allowed. An OnChange handler must not mutate the state of the object.
What is happening is that you have some other code, that we cannot see, that modifies the list, perhaps in a loop. As it modifies the list your event handler clears the list and then the calling code has had the rug pulled from underneath it.
Of course, I'm having to guess here since you did not show complete code. Perhaps the specifics vary somewhat but it seems likely that this is the root of your problem.
You'll need to find another way to solve your problem. With the information available we cannot suggest how to do that.
Looking at your updated code, there's no need for a string list at all. Remove it completely. Instead, where you do:
FLogResult.Add( strData );
do this:
ProcessCommands( strData );
TStrings is an abstract class, ancestor of TStringList. You can create an instance of TStringList and use it as a TStrings.
Related
I maintain an application that runs as a service in a server environment. It is multithreaded, where each thread does work according to a task queue. This task queue is just a list of strings with "job types" as their values. So while several threads may be running, each thread would be a different job, and each thread internally runs just one task at a time.
I'm experiencing an intermittent issue that happens when calling Open on a TADODataSet. Sometimes, not always, and with no discernible pattern, Data.Win.ADODB will throw an EArgumentOutOfRangeException, bypassing my own attempt to catch any exceptions. This exception hangs the entire thread and prevents future execution from being possible until I completely restart the service.
Being relatively new to the world of Delphi, I've been scratching my head at this issue for quite some time, and have struggled to find any answers. My question is: why is this happening, and how do I stop, catch, or fix it?
Here is a snippet of my offending code. This is the method from which the stack trace originates. It is called from another method in the same unit, where I open a different dataset, loop through its records, and on each record call this function to get some info based on the value passed in.
function TFQFoo.DoSomething(IncNo : Int64): string;
var
ItemList : string;
MySQL: string;
ComponentString: string;
begin
result:='';
if IncNo<=0 then
Exit;
ItemList := '';
MyQuery.Close;
MySQL := 'select ID from tbl ' +
' where val = ' + IntToStr(IncNo) +
' order by col1 DESC, col2, col3';
try
try
MyQuery.CommandText := (MySQL);
MyQuery.Open;
while not (MyQuery.EOF) do
begin
if (ItemList <> '') then
ItemList := ItemList + ',';
ItemList := ItemList +
MyQuery.FieldbyName('ID').asstring;
MyQuery.Next;
end;
except
// exception handling code omitted for brevity -- none of it
// is ever reached, anyway (see below)
end;
finally
MyQuery.Close;
end;
Result := ItemList;
end;
The call stack from the exception indicates that it's occurring at Open. No try..catch block will capture the exception and log it for me -- I have to use EurekaLog in order to see any details. The stack trace methods (too big to post here) look like:
TFQFoo.DoSomething
TDataSet.Open
... internal things
TADOConnection.ExecuteComplete
CheckForAsyncExecute
...
TCustomConnection.GetDataSet
TListHelper.GetItemRange
Thinking possibly my TADODataSet component was somehow getting corrupted / its properties altered at runtime, I added some logging to capture that data for me so I could see if something funky was going on there. I didn't see anything, but here it is in case it's pertinent.
object MyQuery: TADODataSet
AutoCalcFields = False
CacheSize = 15
Connection = FGlobals.RIMSDB
CursorType = ctStatic
LockType = ltReadOnly
CommandText =
'select ID from tbl where val = 202005070074 order by col1 ' +
'DESC, col2, col3'
ParamCheck = False
Parameters = <>
Left = 32
Top = 216
end
For the curious, this is the method actually throwing the exception, from Data.Win.ADODB. Note the except, which I guess hops over my own try..catch block and sends the exception straight to EurekaLog.
procedure CheckForAsyncExecute;
var
I: Integer;
begin
try
if not Assigned(pError) and Assigned(pRecordset) and
((pRecordset.State and adStateOpen) <> 0) then
for I := 0 to DataSetCount - 1 do
if (DataSets[I].Recordset = pRecordset) and (eoAsyncExecute in DataSets[I].ExecuteOptions) then
begin
DataSets[I].OpenCursorComplete;
Break;
end;
except
ApplicationHandleException(Self);
end;
end;
What I have tried:
Many, many iterations of tweaking component properties on the ADODataSet itself
Using the CommandText and Parameters from within the designer, and assigning the parameter prior to execution at runtime
Adding / removing a (NOLOCK) hint to the query itself
Taken the problem to senior members of my team for input
Googling (for hours)
Reading up on Delphi and ADO documentation (not fruitful for this)
Attempted reproduction - I've never been able to get this to occur on any test system I use. This leads me to think it may be environment-related, but I have absolutely no clue how
My question, restated:
How do I stop this from happening? What am I doing wrong? I don't want to just catch the EArgumentOutOfRangeException; I want to learn why it's happening in the first place and prevent it from happening in the future.
I know that sometimes, the query execution will not return results, but the typical CommandText does not return a result set message is never seen nor encountered due to the lower-level code bypassing my own catch statement. Beyond this, I don't know what else to look for.
I've only found one other occurrence of something similar so far, but it relates just to the exception not getting caught: http://www.delphigroups.info/2/d9/410191.html
The call to ApplicationHandleException(Self) in CheckForAsyncExecute() is swallowing exceptions, which is why your except block is not being triggered:
// in Data.Win.ADODB.pas:
procedure CheckForAsyncExecute;
var
I: Integer;
begin
try
...
except
ApplicationHandleException(Self); // <-- a caught exception is NOT re-raised here!
end;
end;
Inside of the Data.Win.ADODB unit, caught exceptions will call the unit's own ApplicationHandleException() function, which then calls System.Classes.ApplicationHandleException if assigned, otherwise it simply exits:
// in Data.Win.ADODB.pas:
procedure ApplicationHandleException(Sender: TObject);
begin
if Assigned(System.Classes.ApplicationHandleException) then
System.Classes.ApplicationHandleException(Sender);
end;
System.Classes.ApplicationHandleException is initialized to nil.
In both a VCL1 and FMX app, the TApplication constructor assigns the TApplication.HandleException() method to System.Classes.ApplicationHandleException, where HandleException() ignores EAbort exceptions, and calls the TApplication.OnException event handler (if assigned), the TApplication.ShowException() method, or the System.SyUtils.ShowException() function, depending on the type of exception being handled.
1: in a VCL TService app, TServiceApplication uses Vcl.Forms.TApplication internally.
TApplication.ShowException() displays the details of the exception to the user in a popup MessageBox and then exits, and System.SysUtils.ShowException() displays the details of the exception to the user in a Console or MessageBox and then exits.
So, at no point does ADO's CheckForAsyncExecute() re-raise a caught exception into user code. And needless to say, displaying a popup MessageBox in a service is not a good idea, as the user will likely not see it so they can dismiss it.
Of course, the best option would be to avoid the EArgumentOutOfRangeException exception from being raised in the first place. But there are other conditions that can also raise exceptions, too.
So, your only option to handle swallowed ADO exceptions yourself, and avoid popup MessageBoxes, is to assign a TApplication.OnException event handler (either directly, or via the TApplicationEvents component).
Well, here I am again, trying to resolve an old problem.
Briefly, I get an AV when I try to free a modal form which does not have any owner, and didnt have been freed before.
frmItensVenda := TfrmItensVenda.Create(nil);
frmItensVenda.vtipo := vtipo;
frmItensVenda.vcontrole := strtoint(edit1.Text);
frmItensVenda.Ednota.Text := Edit5.Text;
frmitensvenda.lbvend.Caption := combobox3.Text;
frmitensvenda.lbnome.Caption := combobox1x.Text;
frmItensVenda.limite := limite;
if label10.caption <> '' then
frmItensVenda.vcli := strtoint(label10.caption);
frmItensVenda.ShowModal;
Frmitensvenda.Close;
frmItensVenda.Free;
If I just activate it and then close(without doing a thing), no AV happens. Putting a break-point before the 'free' command, it shows me the variable inside the form if I put the mouse cursor on it.
But if I insert one item in the grid, using the breakpoint at the same place, when I move the cursor to the same line, it doesnt show the variables anymore, but says 'inacessible value'.
And if I proceed running the code, as the next line has the 'free' command I get an AV.
What makes me believe there is some piece of code on that procedure that is doing something unexpected to the code, but I can tell you that there is no 'free' or similar command to the form in question there.
My solution(temporary) was to just comment the '.free' command, but if I run MadException I got a memory leak when I close the application (hey, anything is better than this EAccessViolation thing for me right now..)
Any sugestions?
Ok, found the answer, finally.
The problem was a global array.
It was declared
vm1 : array[1..100] of currency;
but it was assigned a value at position 0.
To my despair, there was no error when the variable was assigned, just when I tried to free the form.
So simple when you find it.. (!!!)
Well, at least I figured it out. Thanks everyone for the support!
OP : frmItensVenda is a global variable automatic created(but not initialized).
I see you do frmItensVenda := TfrmItensVenda.Create(nil);
Look for Application.CreateForm(TfrmItensVenda, frmItensVenda); in your .dpr file.
If it is there you creating a new instance !
{$R *.RES}
begin
Application.Initialize;
Application.Title := 'AServer';
...
Application.CreateForm(TfrmItensVenda, frmItensVenda);
...
Application.Run;
end.
And yes, dynamic form management is a must really (expecially in large applications.).
At trouble with large Forms, part of my solution was to, as much as possible to create dynamic.
Only when they are needed and then free them straight after.
frmItensVenda := TfrmItensVenda.Create(nil);
frmItensVenda.ShowModal;
OP : My solution(temporary) was to just comment the '.free' command,
don't do that : use instead
frmItensVenda.Release;
The "Method Release" removes the form and frees its associated memory.
Release procedure;
description
With release, you can remove the form from memory.
Release is the form to be taken until after the execution of event handlers of the form and its child components is completed.
In all event handlers release should be used instead free to avoid access violations.
The cases where you need to use Release are times when you're in the middle of an event handler (eg, OnClick), where further processing after the event will have to access the form.
In that case calling Release instead posts a WM_RELEASE message which doesn't free the event until the event handler is done and control has returned to the message pump (ProcessMessages/Application.Run).
Reading the delphi help though, it is recommended that you use the release command.
As for the Release v.s Free method. My understanding is that "Release" is specific to forms, and allows form-related even-handlers to finish before freeing resources.
Whereas "Free" is a generic method of freeing an object from memory (so should also work with forms.)
For some of my procedures and functions, I have implemented various checks on parameters in order to force execution to stop if parameters are out of range in one way or another.
I find it better to check for this in my own code rather than have an abnormal crash due to a perhaps bad memory-write.
Consider the simple code:
PROCEDURE Test(OneDigitNumbers:BYTE);
BEGIN
IF OneDigitNumbers>9 THEN ProduceErrorMessage;
END;
begin
Test( 1);
Test( 2);
Test( 9);
Test(12);
end.
I have no problem in actually producing an error message, my only "problem" is that the debugger in Delphi always point to the procedure creating the exception.
Is there a method of creating this exception or error message so that the debugger point to the line where the parameter is out of range?
In my example, it should point to :
Test(12);
and maybe say something like "Parameter out of range. Valid range is 0-9. Parameter passed was: 12"
Even an answer to say that this is NOT possible will be useful (if you know for sure that this is not possible), because then I will just forget about this and make an alternative method for debugging.
To answer the question as asked, you can make the test function inline:
procedure Test(OneDigitNumbers: byte); inline;
The compiler will then write the code for Test into each calling function. Whilst you can do this, my advice is that you do not. It's just a trick but I don't think it really helps you.
If you want to raise the exception at the return address, you can do this:
raise Exception.CreateFmt(
'Exception blah blah at %p.',
[ReturnAddress]
) at ReturnAddress;
If you want to go further up the stack, then you'll have to use something like CaptureStackBackTrace. Combine the back trace with raise at and you can raise the exception at any point in the call stack, if really you think that's a good idea. I do not think it's a good idea, as I explain below.
If you use a good debugging tool, like madExcept, then the call stacks in the madExcept bug reports will tell you all you need to know when an error occurs.
With the extra clarification in the comments, it seems that what you really want to happen is for the exception to contain information from higher up the call stack. To my mind it is a violation of encapsulation to ask the callee to report information about its caller. So if you want to include information from the caller, let the caller catch the exception, add the information, and re-raise.
You're looking for a subrange type.
type
TOneDigitNumber = 0..9;
procedure Test(OneDigitNumbers: TOneDigitNumber);
begin
// Do something
end;
begin
Test( 1);
Test( 2);
Test( 9);
Test(12); // compiler error '[DCC Error] MyStuffTest.pas(33): E1012 Constant expression violates subrange bounds
end.
A bit of an elaboration on my comment to your question
type
EMyOwnRangeError = class(ERangeError)
// You can also add your own member variables for easier inspection
public
constructor CreateFrom(const aRangeError: ERangeError);
end;
constructor EMyOwnRangeError.CreateFrom(const aRangeError: ERangeError);
begin
// Do whatever you need to inspect the call stack in aRangeError
// and modify the message and/or set any extra member variable that you
// you define on EMyOwnRangeError.
// No help from me on this, quite simply because I don't have Delphi
// installed on the machine I am currently working at.
end;
procedure MySpecialTest(const aWhatever: Byte);
begin
try
if (aWhatever < 0) or (aWhatever > SOMEUPPERRANGE) then
raise ERangeError.Create;
// Normal code for MySpecialTest
except
on E: ERangeError do raise EMyOwnRangeError.CreateFrom(E);
else
raise; // Make sure other exceptions are propagated.
end;
end;
I have now tested basically the approach in the idea I got from David Heffernan.
I simply added this simple code in one of my units of reuseables:
PROCEDURE TestError(Par:BYTE);
BEGIN
TRY
FINALLY
IF Par>9 THEN Raise Exception.CreateFmt('Error Blah blah blah at ',[Par]) AT #Par;
END;
END;
When this procedure is called with a parameter higher than 9 then it forces an exception.
Delphi ask "Break or Continue" and I click Break.
The result is almost what I would like, but it is so close that I can live with that.
The debugger pops up with a nice red line on the line AFTER the one calling the procedure.
I tried withouth the TRY-Finally-End also, and then it is plain wrong, actually showing the red line another level back from the callstack..
Anyway. I feel that this result is an awful lot better than what I had before. Now my debugging will be a joy rather than a pain.
Thank you :)
I'm automating Word with Delphi, but some times I got an error message:
The requested member of the collection
does not exist
It seems that the Item member of the Styles collection class does not always exist and some times causes the above mentioned error. My workaround is to catch the exception and skip it, but is there anyway to detect it instead of using the try...except block? The problem with the try...except block is that when debugging the raised exception is annoying...
My code example:
var
aWordDoc: _WordDocument
i: Integer;
ovI: OleVariant;
wordStyle: Style;
begin
for i := 1 to aWordDoc.Styles.Count do
begin
ovI := i;
try
wordStyle := aWordDoc.Styles.Item(ovI);
except
Continue;//skip if any error occurred.
end;
//do something with wordStyle
end;
end
If the compiler accepts it, but it sometimes cannot happen to exist, it is probably IDispatch based latebinding. IDispatch objects can be queried. Maybe carefully working yourself up the tree querying every object for the next would work.
You would then roughly be doing what the compiler does, except that that one throws an exception if somethines doesn't exist. (and if the exception comes in from COM, maybe a slightly different code path can test more).
Sorry to have no readily made code.
I get that message when a bookmark that I'm trying to fill from Word doesn't exist so i have a process that checks first, but I'm not sure the same method would work for you.
procedure MergeData(strBookMark, strData : string);
begin
if WinWord.ActiveDocument.Bookmarks.Exists(strBookMark) = True then
WinWord.ActiveDocument.FormFields.Item(strBookMark).Result := strData;
end;
It has nothing to do with the Item function not being there. The Item function does exists, but the index you give seems to be wrong.
See this msdn article.
An invalid index seems really weird, because you are performing a for loop from 1 to Styles.Count. So if there is no Style, you should not enter the loop.
The only plausible explanation I can think of is that while you are in your loop, the Styles.Count changes and you are getting out of bounds. Are you deleting styles in your loop perhaps? Try a loop going from Styles.Count downto 1 or try a While loop, evaluating Styles.Count at every iteration.
Other things I can think of, but are very unlikely:
While assigning I to ovI, it gets converted to an OleString, so Word searches for a style named "I", instead of a Style at I
While assigning I to ovI, something in the conversion goes wrong and it gets in the range of $FFFFFFA5 - $FFFFFFFF, which are constants for Builtin styles.
try checking if it is null or not with a IF statement
Im not sure if i have explaned this the best i can but, here we go...
I have 2 Custom components on a form, Which are link together at design time through the IDE. Whenever i call a procedure from on of the Component i get the Access violation,
Access violation at address 0049A614
in module 'Project2.exe'. Read of
address 00000034.
This is a small section of my code
TMyClient = class(TClientSocket)
{...}
end;
and...
TPresence = class(TComponent)
private
ftheClient: TMyClient
public
procedure SetStatus(status: string);
published
property UserName : string read fUserName write fUserName;
property theClient: TMyClient read ftheClient write ftheClient;
end;
procedure TPresence.SetStatus(status: string);
begin
try
***** if theClient = nil then
Exception.Create('theClient is Nil');
except
on e:Exception do
MessageDlg(e.classname+', '+e.message, mtWarning, [mbOK], 0);
end;
{...}
end;
0049A614 is at the *****, and the IDE stops here.
I Have also tried to do the assign at run time with
Presence1.theClient := MyClient1;
with no luck
using procedures from Presence1 or MyClient1 that do not rely on each other work fine.
Delphi 7
Follow Up:
from mghie comments, i rethought about it.
I removed the TPresence Component from the form (which caused some strange IDE errors, that might have had something to do with it) and created it design time, assigning everything that was needed. Now it works, but putting the TPresence Component back on the from brings the error back.
Thankyou for your help guys, i should be able to work this one out now, if i can't ill reopen another question :)
You seem to be thinking that the exception is raised because the client field of Presence1 is not set - if you do however get the exception "Read of address 00000034" it means that the Self pointer in the SetStatus() call is nil. That would indicate that you call SetStatus() on an unassigned TPresence reference. It is not really possible to tell the reason for that from the snippet you posted, but it should get you started debugging.
I would still advise you to write a proper setter method for all component references in your own custom components - first because you have a better hook when debugging such problems (you can set a breakpoint there), and second because you should always call TComponent.FreeNotification() on such linked components to be able to track their destruction and set the internal reference to nil.
We probably need more of your code. It is possible you are not correctly creating an instance of TPresence which would give you the error you are experiencing. Try to give us a simple as possible code snippet that causes your error.