Author |
Message |
Marti #1 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
I have a slight problem running the BP7 editor under Windows 2000, which really prevents me from using it because its so annoying. It seems to affect the keyboard input. If you have a dos window open and start BP, then you start pressing any key in the editing window, the auto-repeating of the keys doesn't occur continuously; it occurs in bursts. This is really annoying if the key you press doesn't appear instantly on the screen. Can anyone explain how to fix this, or can anyone recommend an alternate editor (with similar keyboard commands etc) for use with Win2k? Thanks. Martin
|
Sun, 25 Apr 2004 08:25:54 GMT |
|
|
Jan Philip #2 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
Quote: >I have a slight problem running the BP7 editor under Windows 2000, >which really prevents me from using it because its so annoying. It >seems to affect the keyboard input.
I have a similar problem under WinXP. Nothing will happen for about 1/2 second after pressing a key, then it will catch up all at once, then do nothing for a while, etc.
|
Sun, 25 Apr 2004 10:08:54 GMT |
|
|
The Scarlet Manuk #3 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
Quote: > I have a slight problem running the BP7 editor under Windows 2000, > which really prevents me from using it because its so annoying. It > seems to affect the keyboard input. If you have a dos window open and > start BP, then you start pressing any key in the editing window, the > auto-repeating of the keys doesn't occur continuously; it occurs in > bursts. This is really annoying if the key you press doesn't appear > instantly on the screen.
Have you tried running it in full-screen mode? In windowed mode I get similar behaviour (though not very troublesome); in full- screen mode I have no problems. But the main reason I use full- screen mode is because the mouse pointer works properly that way! Or you can use the BPW editor - I don't have any trouble with that. (I don't run programs from the BPW IDE much, though - no single stepping; how am I supposed to debug them properly?) -- The Scarlet Manuka
|
Sun, 25 Apr 2004 11:04:18 GMT |
|
|
Marti #4 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
Quote: >Have you tried running it in full-screen mode? In windowed mode >I get similar behaviour (though not very troublesome); in full- >screen mode I have no problems. But the main reason I use full- >screen mode is because the mouse pointer works properly that way! >Or you can use the BPW editor - I don't have any trouble with that. >(I don't run programs from the BPW IDE much, though - no single >stepping; how am I supposed to debug them properly?)
Yup, the problem goes away in full screen mode. However, it looks so ugly (50 line mode) I dunno if I could work in that environment! <g> I've also noticed that the problem stays with the dos window even after BP has been exited. If you then open a new dos window it is fine, then as soon as you run BP the problem crops up again. I think I'll try BPW and see how it works out, I forgot about that proggy. Time to find the 'ol BP7 disks... Thanks! Martin
|
Sun, 25 Apr 2004 13:04:06 GMT |
|
|
Frank Peel #5 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
... Quote: > Yup, the problem goes away in full screen mode. However, it looks so > ugly (50 line mode) I dunno if I could work in that environment! <g> > I've also noticed that the problem stays with the dos window even > after BP has been exited. If you then open a new dos window it is > fine, then as soon as you run BP the problem crops up again. > I think I'll try BPW and see how it works out, I forgot about that > proggy. Time to find the 'ol BP7 disks...
This may be a complete red herring, but could it have something to do with the way that BP hogs the CPU when it's waiting for a keypress? I'm wondering what you see could be explained by Win2k detecting that your DOS shell is a CPU hog and throttling it. I don't have Win2k, so it's just a wild guess. The program quoted below is not mine. I got it from here, or possibly from somewhere else on the net. The Writeln at the end suggests that it was called IdleKey, the copy on my machine is called BP.EXE. Unfortunately I do not know who wrote it. It should release the CPU when BP is waiting for a keypress. You rename your BP IDE to BPX.EXE, and run this BP.EXE in the same directory, then run it instead of the original IDE. It hooks the keyboard interrupt and runs BPX.EXE, your original IDE. When the IDE exits, this BP.EXE restores the original keyboard handler and returns to DOS. Result - you run BP.EXE from the command line as before and it works as before except for not hogging the CPU so much. Maybe you could try it and see if it makes a difference? FP {$A-,B-,D+,E-,F-,G+,I-,L+,N-,O-,P-,Q-,R-,S-,T-,V-,X+,Y+} {$M 4096,0,0} Program BP7; uses dos; {********************************************************************* ** Version 0.91 This little program was designed to save CPU time in Windows 95/98/NT running Borland Pascal. It also works brilliantly in programs (run in the IDE) that do a "repeat until keypressed". Copy the executable into the same directory as BP.EXE. The program grabs interrupt 16 (keyboard interrupt) and performs a task switch whenever bp queries the keyboard buffer (if it's empty). ********************************************************************** *} VAR oldint16:pointer; Procedure newint16;far;assembler;asm
push ds {save DS} push ax
mov ds,ax {Make DS = our DS} pop ax cmp ah, $11
cmp ah,1 {Set flag if Keyboard buffer query}
Pushf {push dummy on stack to simulate intxx call} call dword ptr (oldint16) {call farr old interrupt routine} pop DS {Restore data segment} pushf {flags are vital-save them}
popf pushf {Was the buffer empty?}
push ax {Yes, so program is idle. Save AX,} mov ax,1680h {Do a taskswitch now,} int 2fh pop ax {and restore AX again}
POPF {these are the flags from old int16} RETF 2 {and ready!} end; Var pCmdLine : ^String; begin pCmdLine := Ptr(PrefixSeg, $80); Swapvectors; getintvec($16,oldint16);
dos.exec(GetEnv('ComSpec'),' /C bpx '+pCmdLine^); setintvec($16,oldint16); Swapvectors; Writeln('IdleKey terminated - type Exit again to leave DOS shell'); end.
|
Sun, 25 Apr 2004 23:18:07 GMT |
|
|
Rufus V. Smit #6 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
Quote:
> >I have a slight problem running the BP7 editor under Windows 2000, > >which really prevents me from using it because its so annoying. It > >seems to affect the keyboard input. > I have a similar problem under WinXP. Nothing will happen for about > 1/2 second after pressing a key, then it will catch up all at once, > then do nothing for a while, etc.
There was some earlier postings about the TP or BP IDE consuming processor resources during keyboard scanning. Look for my message titled: Re: BP and TP under Windows XP Dated: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 9:02 AM If your news server doesn't go back that far, tell me and I'll repost it. Rufus
|
Sun, 25 Apr 2004 22:23:48 GMT |
|
|
Jan Philip #7 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
Quote: >Tuesday, October 16, 2001 9:02 AM >If your news server doesn't go back that far, >tell me and I'll repost it.
I went back and got all messages for this NG, and the original wasn't there but there were replies on 10/18 and 10/19. This was quoted Quote: >>It probably transmits the timestamped keystroke to microsoft over the >>internet, log's the activity, verifies that you have a valid copy of XP, >>transmits the validated and re-encripted keystroke back to your app.
But I didn't see any solution. Is there a solution? (The keyboard does work correctly in full screen mode.)
|
Mon, 26 Apr 2004 00:40:52 GMT |
|
|
Rufus V. Smit #8 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
Repost follows. Hey, look at that, it was an old posting of mine as a response to YOUR question! I don't suppose it helped then, either?
Quote:
> >Tuesday, October 16, 2001 9:02 AM > >If your news server doesn't go back that far, > >tell me and I'll repost it. > I went back and got all messages for this NG, and the original wasn't > there but there were replies on 10/18 and 10/19. This was quoted > >>It probably transmits the timestamped keystroke to microsoft over the > >>internet, log's the activity, verifies that you have a valid copy of XP, > >>transmits the validated and re-encripted keystroke back to your app. > But I didn't see any solution. Is there a solution? > (The keyboard does work correctly in full screen mode.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------
Quote: > When I run BP or TP under Windows XP, the keyboard response is > terrible. It takes about 1/2 second to process a keystroke. I have a > 1.3 GHz Athlon, so it shouldn't take 600,000,000 clock cycles to read > a keystroke and write it to the screen. > Is there a way to fix this?
Are you talking about running the IDE itself or a compiled program? Are you talking about the keyboard response to BP or to other app's oor both? I recently read in one of the newsgroups (I believe) this same topic about the IDE running up the resources when run from windows. I think it spins on waiting for a keypress and there was a solution posted that ran the IDE in a shell, capturing the keyboard buffer interrupt, and swapping out when the buffer was empty to give other tasks the processor. (this would be the answer if you are having "other window" response problems while the IDE is running in a window.) A search in groups.google.com might find that thread... (I just checked but couldn't find it... If I do, I'll post it... I don't think I was dreaming...) Aha, It was near the beginning of last month - releasing process time to windows 98. I dont know if the solution works for XP. Here it is: <QUOTE>
Quote: > Just something I think I have heard about some time, but not sure.... > Does it exist a patch (unofficial I think) that patches the BP7.EXE such > that when idle it will release process time back to Win9x? When it is run in > a DOS window, it consumes very much time just sitting there idle.
It's a program you run which hooks the keyboard interrupt before launching BP.EXE. It was posted here about 2 1/2 years ago...
bhar:Freeware goodie: making BP7 go multitasking Grpa nuachta:comp.lang.pascal.borland Dta:1999-02-22 Hi everybody, here's a small utility that will make the BP IDE consume less CPU time under windows 95/98/NT !!! Borland Pascal (and in fact, all Pascal versions that use Turbo Vision in the IDE) consume 100% CPU time under Windows 95/98/NT. The reason for this, is that Windows can't determine when the IDE is "idle". In my own Turbo Vision programs, I have modified the "GetKeyEvent" source (unit drivers) to perform a task swich under Windows if no event is waiting. Unfortunately I don't have the sources for the BP IDE, so I can't do the same thing for the compiler itself. I managed to circumvent it by writing a small "shell" that performs the trick. Please compile the code snippet below, and copy the executable (bp7.exe) into the same directory where you keep Borland Pascal(bp.exe). Now whenever you call BP7.EXE, it will hook itself into the keyboard interrupt and then automatically load BP.EXE. You'll notice that Borland Pascal runs a LOT smoother under Windows now, and consumes almost NO CPU time if it's idle !!! Drop me a mail if you're happy with it. -- (To answer me, remove the ".net" from my e-mail address) Arthur M. Hoornweg {$A-,B-,D+,E-,F-,G+,I-,L+,N-,O-,P-,Q-,R-,S-,T-,V-,X+,Y+} {$M 4096,0,0} Program BP7; uses dos; {********************************************************************* ** Version 0.91 This little program was designed to save CPU time in Windows 95/98/NT running Borland Pascal. It also works brilliantly in programs (run in the IDE) that do a "repeat until keypressed". Copy the executable into the same directory as BP.EXE. The program grabs interrupt 16 (keyboard interrupt) and performs a task switch whenever bp queries the keyboard buffer (if it's empty). ********************************************************************** *} VAR oldint16:pointer; Procedure newint16;far;assembler;asm
push ds {save DS} push ax
mov ds,ax {Make DS = our DS} pop ax cmp ah,1 {Set flag if Keyboard buffer query}
Pushf {push dummy on stack to simulate intxx call} call dword ptr (oldint16) {call farr old interrupt routine} pop DS {Restore data segment} pushf {flags are vital-save them}
popf pushf {Was the buffer empty?}
push ax {Yes, so program is idle. Save AX,} mov ax,1680h {Do a taskswitch now,} int 2fh pop ax {and restore AX again}
POPF {these are the flags from old int16} RETF 2 {and ready!} end; var s:string; d:dirstr; n:namestr; e:extstr; begin fsplit(paramstr(0),d,n,e); Swapvectors; getintvec($16,oldint16);
dos.exec(D+'BP.EXE',''); setintvec($16,oldint16); Swapvectors; end. </QUOTE> hth Rufus P.S. If it works, let us know.
|
Mon, 26 Apr 2004 01:00:37 GMT |
|
|
Marti #9 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
Quote: >Maybe you could try it and see if it makes a difference? >FP
Thanks for posting that Frank, but it didn't work. I also tried another similar program i found via google (bp7.pas not bp.pas) but no luck. I think I will try to see if there are any funny Win2k settings I can play with... Martin
|
Mon, 26 Apr 2004 01:48:05 GMT |
|
|
Jan Philip #10 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
Quote: >Repost follows. Hey, look at that, it was an old posting of mine >as a response to YOUR question! >I don't suppose it helped then, either?
Well, the problem is that it happens to all DOS programs I've tried under XP in a command line window - not just BP IDE or TP IDE - and including TP/BP programs, even if they don't use Turbo Vision. I was hoping for some sort of setting in Windows that would solve the problem for all DOS programs.
|
Mon, 26 Apr 2004 01:53:19 GMT |
|
|
Markus Hum #11 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
Quote:
>>Repost follows. Hey, look at that, it was an old posting of mine >>as a response to YOUR question! >>I don't suppose it helped then, either? > Well, the problem is that it happens to all DOS programs I've tried > under XP in a command line window - not just BP IDE or TP IDE - and > including TP/BP programs, even if they don't use Turbo Vision. I was > hoping for some sort of setting in Windows that would solve the > problem for all DOS programs.
Maybe do this: 1. run CMD 2. Type in: START /HIGH pogrammfile.exe Perhaps is get better then because it gets more CPU then... You also might try /REALTIME instead of /HIGH... Greetings Markus
|
Mon, 26 Apr 2004 02:15:06 GMT |
|
|
Jan Philip #12 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
On Wed, 07 Nov 2001 19:15:06 +0100, Markus Humm Quote:
>1. run CMD >2. Type in: START /HIGH pogrammfile.exe >Perhaps is get better then because it gets more CPU then... >You also might try /REALTIME instead of /HIGH...
Neither of those helped. :-(
|
Mon, 26 Apr 2004 02:16:57 GMT |
|
|
Jan Philip #13 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
Quote: >Thanks for posting that Frank, but it didn't work. I also tried >another similar program i found via google (bp7.pas not bp.pas) but >no luck. I think I will try to see if there are any funny Win2k >settings I can play with...
I tried all of the compatibility modes, since I didn't have this problem with 95, 98, or ME. None of them fixed it, so if you find a setting, please let us know.
|
Mon, 26 Apr 2004 02:18:12 GMT |
|
|
Neil Smit #14 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
Hmmmmm ..... Pardon me for interupting your discussion, but if you can bear to part from Borlands own version of Pascal trying using DevPascal 1.9 avaiable from http://www.{*filter*}shed.net/ . I'm not a sales person but it looks so much nicer to program in and runs fine under my copy of XP and before that ME.
Quote:
> >Thanks for posting that Frank, but it didn't work. I also tried > >another similar program i found via google (bp7.pas not bp.pas) but > >no luck. I think I will try to see if there are any funny Win2k > >settings I can play with... > I tried all of the compatibility modes, since I didn't have this > problem with 95, 98, or ME. None of them fixed it, so if you find a > setting, please let us know.
|
Tue, 27 Apr 2004 02:57:22 GMT |
|
|
Marti #15 / 19
|
BP7 editor under Win2k
On Thu, 8 Nov 2001 18:57:22 -0000, "Neil Smith" Quote:
>Hmmmmm ..... >Pardon me for interupting your discussion, but if you can bear to part from >Borlands own version of Pascal trying using DevPascal 1.9 avaiable from >http://www.{*filter*}shed.net/ . I'm not a sales person but it looks so much >nicer to program in and runs fine under my copy of XP and before that ME.
Thanks for the tip! I'll try that. Martin
|
Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:27:22 GMT |
|
|
Page 1 of 2
|
[ 19 post ] |
|
Go to page:
[1]
[2] |
|