Hello everyone!
Sorry to mention that, but the new BAHN 3.85r3 seems not to work properly
Get access violations and exceptions when work in any layout of 3.85r2 and previous - program terminates.
Don't know about 3.85r3 ones, but included demo_0.nt3 seems to run ok, though.
Regards,
Ilya.
BAHN 3.85r3
-
- Beiträge: 2200
- Registriert: Sonntag 16. März 2003, 15:25
- Kontaktdaten:
Re: BAHN 3.85r3 Problem
Hello,
"Any layout" - means "all"? I tried it with many layouts from my own collection and from the Layout Archive website, with no problem.
Is there some example available for me, i.e. from the Layout Archives Website or from my own one?
Does the problem occur while loading the layout, or after?
Does it occur when simulation is running, or even in stopped status?
Is it possible to prevent it when zooming out to schematic view before loading a layout?
Does it occur also when you did not load any layout but the start example is running?
What OS do you use?
Regards,
Jan B.
Could you give some more details please:Ilya hat geschrieben:Hello everyone!
Sorry to mention that, but the new BAHN 3.85r3 seems not to work properly
Get access violations and exceptions when work in any layout of 3.85r2 and previous - program terminates.
Don't know about 3.85r3 ones, but included demo_0.nt3 seems to run ok, though.
Regards,
Ilya.
"Any layout" - means "all"? I tried it with many layouts from my own collection and from the Layout Archive website, with no problem.
Is there some example available for me, i.e. from the Layout Archives Website or from my own one?
Does the problem occur while loading the layout, or after?
Does it occur when simulation is running, or even in stopped status?
Is it possible to prevent it when zooming out to schematic view before loading a layout?
Does it occur also when you did not load any layout but the start example is running?
What OS do you use?
Regards,
Jan B.
Re: BAHN 3.85r3
Hello!
- Wandernetz "Regio" ver.704
- Jaunakmene (downloaded, re-saved with no changes in 3.85r2)
One more point: both layouts I'm talking about include certain missing user-defined graphics. Maybe is here something wrong about it?
Regards,
Ilya.
For you to check from JBSS-Archiv:"Any layout" - means "all"? I tried it with many layouts from my own collection and from the Layout Archive website, with no problem.
Is there some example available for me, i.e. from the Layout Archives Website or from my own one?
- Wandernetz "Regio" ver.704
- Jaunakmene (downloaded, re-saved with no changes in 3.85r2)
After. You may load the layout, run it, make changes etc, but some minutes later the program crashes. I got this message every time when used fast navigation keys (PgUp, PgDn, Del, End, Home) several times one after another.Does the problem occur while loading the layout, or after?
One more point: both layouts I'm talking about include certain missing user-defined graphics. Maybe is here something wrong about it?
Got that trouble in both cases.Does it occur when simulation is running, or even in stopped status?
Hm... don't know. I'll check.Is it possible to prevent it when zooming out to schematic view before loading a layout?
Both start example and demo_0.nt3 (included in package) work perfectly.Does it occur also when you did not load any layout but the start example is running?
Windows XP SP2.What OS do you use?
Regards,
Ilya.
Re: BAHN 3.85r3
I could be wrong, but a read on a nice clean low address such as 0x500 would seem to me that either a value has been written directly to a pointer, or an attempt has been made to dereference something that isn't a pointer.
-
- Beiträge: 2200
- Registriert: Sonntag 16. März 2003, 15:25
- Kontaktdaten:
Re: BAHN 3.85r3
Hello,
The combination of (old style user-defined vehicles, i.e. .ufg file, + normal view Zoom 1:1 or higher) was precondition.
Now it should work better, I hope.
Grtx
Jan B.
It was a reference to a (NULL pointer + some offset), ofcourse. Check for NULL became a victim of optimization before. And it was only reading attempt to -wrong- pixel data, i.e. not very dangerous, even if Windows would have allowed it.Chris hat geschrieben:I could be wrong, but a read on a nice clean low address such as 0x500 would seem to me that either a value has been written directly to a pointer, or an attempt has been made to dereference something that isn't a pointer.
The combination of (old style user-defined vehicles, i.e. .ufg file, + normal view Zoom 1:1 or higher) was precondition.
Now it should work better, I hope.
Grtx
Jan B.