Recent

Author Topic: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?  (Read 11154 times)

Pluto

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 29
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #15 on: January 14, 2019, 09:03:52 pm »
Thank you for the awesome responses!  I think the fact that I got 13 replies inside of two hours from a forum for a "dead" language bodes well...

before answering your question can you answer me this
Why are you here? What pulled you in to even try lazarus/pascal after 18 years in other languages?

I'm here because I can find no other good-old-fashion C++ RAD tool that looks even remotely as coherent as Lazarus.  It looks like the easiest way to get up and running with Raspberry Pi.

I'm mystified that C++ doesn't have its own tool with the support and maturity that Lazarus has.

Lazarus/Free Pascal is excellent for many things. It has its weaknesses BUT I believe that it we can get enough mindshare in the embedded devices market and make it a viable alternative for IoT, it may become fashionable again.

IoT is indeed the reason I'm asking!


bee

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 393
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #16 on: January 15, 2019, 01:51:01 am »
Sometimes, Pascal was No. 1 in RAD world thanks to Borland and there were many programmers was grown with and get used to making console and GUI app very fast regarding the language.
It's still no.1 in RAD for Linux, nothing close to FPC/Lazarus on Linux. Thanks to those of core developers of Free Pascal and Lazarus IDE.

Today, Pascal is a pretty much dead language, but have quite a bit middle age and senior nostalgic, not willing nor have a need to spend the time to learn another language. When they're gone, the Pascal will go for good as well.
I don't think so. I managed a local Pascal developers group with thousands of members and there are always newcomers join the group and learn Pascal programming.

Pascal is as well pretty much dead in schools today as an educational tool. The world is changed quite a bit from pioneers days of electronic and software from 70' and 80'...
Nope. There are some countries, especially in Asia and East Europe, that are still using Pascal in schools even colleges. Mine is one of them. A college in Russia created its own version on Pascal for Net. named PascalABC.

IMO, the best for the embedded world is to stick with industrial standard languages such as C/C++. It is hard that will ever die.
You should see the Ultibo project.  :)
-Bee-

A long time pascal lover.

marcov

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 11383
  • FPC developer.
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #17 on: January 15, 2019, 10:39:19 am »
I promise I'm not a troll.  Why is everybody here?  What keeps you in Pascal?  Is this the best option for Raspberry Pi?  Or do I stick with C++ and use something like Ultimate++?

Getting things done on time.

Popularity contests are no guarantee for that. Focussing on language alone is misleading, since the same language is no guarantee you can actually take your code (and time investments) with you from one project to the next.  Architecture, GUI widget sets and other frameworks and their portability are important too.

In general I'm wary of the next big thing(language or framework), because they rarely make good on their promises short term, and you have already several major-version rewrites under the belt before it stabilizes, if it doesn't fade totally. There are of course hypothetical sweet spots, where you only maintain just one application and a new framework  is a perfect fit, but that never happened to me in 20 years of professional programming. IOW so rare that it can't be planned for.

My recommendation: such general threads like this are equal to trolling in content, even if not the intention. Focus on short term goals, and don't overestimate the importance of popularity/mindshare and of language in general. You are not a sheep. It is not that hard to do a bit of C, if you are used to Pascal, that is no reason to do everything in plain C. If you have a real problem, you are usually on your own, even if there are 1 million newbies asking about their "hello world" level programs.

P.s. am currently debugging an embedded product where two C compilers from the same vendor behave differently. There are no guarantees, sigh.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2019, 12:31:48 pm by marcov »

Akira1364

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #18 on: January 16, 2019, 02:33:43 am »
Well, it is baiting, Your biases and sheer disdain for Object Pascal are insurmountable.

Are they? Personally I feel like you're reading this guy's intentions entirely the wrong way.

guest63552

  • Guest
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #19 on: January 16, 2019, 05:17:14 am »
You should see the Ultibo project.  :)

No, I'm not interested. My almost 40 years carrier as a professional programmers and more than 20 with Delphi was finished long time ago and I have focused currently on embedded world and C++. The fact that I made some GUI utility from time to time with Lazarus if need to be done fast and to have multi-platform support for my own use, make me not interesting in Pascal nowadays.

It is all about perception and need.

440bx

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3944
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #20 on: January 16, 2019, 05:37:53 am »
It is all about perception and need.
There is definitely a lot of truth to the perception part.  Perception and reality are often two very different things.   

Some people are guided by perception, others do their best to be guided by logic. 

Just because a large number of people use a particular language, it doesn't mean it's good, except in sheep-logic.
(FPC v3.0.4 and Lazarus 1.8.2) or (FPC v3.2.2 and Lazarus v3.2) on Windows 7 SP1 64bit.

guest63552

  • Guest
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #21 on: January 16, 2019, 07:06:32 am »
Some people are guided by perception, others do their best to be guided by logic. 

You have misunderstood upper...

I have answered about my personal need for Pascal today, not expressed general point about programming. To be good professional programmer (not just a plain developer) long time ago was required to have IQ far over average (mine is over 148), well educated and have wide range of abilities including designing (from system to user applications), optimization and so on.

Today,  there is an army of mediocrities so called "IT experts", "programmers", "developers ", making extremely improperly designed projects with quite inefficient code relying on fast hardware and huge RAM.

Long time ago, programming was more art than plain "do what CEOs said fast, with minimum effort"...

I remember years ago, some car manufacturer where used extensively recursion in onboard computer, which brake general safely regulations, causing memory corruption and unintentional (by driver) acceleration. With combination of cheap hardware, that was deadly combination resulting in worldwide scandal... Recently, "Tesla" had an incident with autonomous driving...

Safety issue and requirements  influence on everything else. If use free compiler which make army of unknown capability individuals, having high possibility for bugs and regression - logic dictate you will never use it for professional purpose. If you use it for fun and self education, I see no problem to use whatever you want.

In embedded world, you have to use proven tools to make a job properly, or you will end with highly dangerous or potentially deadly product...

Just to make some parallels with what you wrote about perception and logic.

balazsszekely

  • Guest
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #22 on: January 16, 2019, 08:01:17 am »
@po123
Quote
To be good professional programmer (not just a plain developer) long time ago was required to have IQ far over average (mine is over 148)
::) Bragging with high IQ is usually sing of not so high IQ, but OK if you really have over 148, then you're smarter then 99.93 % of the population.  :)

guest63552

  • Guest
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #23 on: January 16, 2019, 08:24:56 am »
@po123
Quote
To be good professional programmer (not just a plain developer) long time ago was required to have IQ far over average (mine is over 148)
::) Bragging with high IQ is usually sing of not so high IQ, but OK if you really have over 148, then you're smarter then 99.93 % of the population.  :)

:) I'm too old and there is nothing to bragging in this pathetic world full of contradictions and nonsense...

I'm just briefly here to set some things for FPC and Lazarus, using it just for my personal entertainment. I know very well that this forum is highly rated as very hostile environment whatever anyone said, no matter being fact, lie, insinuation or personal opinion - always will be someone ready to insult. I do not really need that.

JD

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1848
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #24 on: January 16, 2019, 08:54:47 am »

:) I'm too old and there is nothing to bragging in this pathetic world full of contradictions and nonsense...

I'm just briefly here to set some things for FPC and Lazarus, using it just for my personal entertainment. I know very well that this forum is highly rated as very hostile environment whatever anyone said, no matter being fact, lie, insinuation or personal opinion - always will be someone ready to insult. I do not really need that.

Can we ALL please get along? This forum is not hostile when compared to StackOverflow, at least in my opinion. No comment/question is ever deleted/closed here because it is deemed non-constructive.  :D

Besides we all need each other and can learn from each other so why burn bridges. Lazarus/FreePascal is still a niche product so the more programmers that use it, the better for us all. No need for offence, insults and the like.

Just think of this forum as a normal company environment where we have to get along for the common goal of keeping the company viable. That is my perspective even if it is different from the reality.  :D

Besides we are trying to answer a question a new/potential user asked. Let's keep that in mind.

Cheers,

JD
« Last Edit: January 16, 2019, 09:01:38 am by JD »
Windows - Lazarus 2.1/FPC 3.2 (built using fpcupdeluxe),
Linux Mint - Lazarus 2.1/FPC 3.2 (built using fpcupdeluxe)

mORMot; Zeos 8; SQLite, PostgreSQL & MariaDB; VirtualTreeView

HeavyUser

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #25 on: January 16, 2019, 09:44:31 am »
In embedded world, you have to use proven tools to make a job properly, or you will end with highly dangerous or potentially deadly product...
There is your answer, you are here because lazarus looks convenient and probably you where able to get a demo to work fast, but you lack the will to test it and see for your self. Now knowing nothing about your work or testing abilities I can not know if it fits your way of developing (I doubt any one can from a post on a board) and since you only fill safe when you use "proven tools"  as you put it (and I guess if they have support for the embedded platform you are interested in) then I have no choice but to recommend that you should look for the tools that have your minimum requirements.
It is obvious that you are not interested in having fun with lazarus (as you try to convince us that you do) otherwise you would simple use it for the fun of it and possibly try to port some of its abilities to your "professional" tools.

Now please keep in mind that I'm not a psychologist or social worker of any kind those are my objective observations of your responses on this thread so far and I could be wrong.

In any case, it is proven that fpc can be used for embedded, desktop and mobile development it requires a bit more work from your average commercial tool to set it up and use it but there is nothing stopping you from using it in any situation if you have the creativity to do so.

as far as the bite the bullet part no one here can answer that for you.

marcov

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 11383
  • FPC developer.
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #26 on: January 16, 2019, 10:01:17 am »
In embedded world, you have to use proven tools to make a job properly, or you will end with highly dangerous or potentially deadly product...

But still you get paid less everytime. Minimizing overhead is a good thing, and if you need to redo proofing for some product, why not a cheaper alternative.

Unless you are an old immovable pseudo monopolist

guest63552

  • Guest
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #27 on: January 16, 2019, 11:09:23 am »

But still you get paid less everytime. Minimizing overhead is a good thing, and if you need to redo proofing for some product, why not a cheaper alternative.

Unless you are an old immovable pseudo monopolist

Your point of view is quite narrow and in the same time you are exceptionally rude and insinuating person. Especially being moderator - it seems you have to read basic forum rules by yourselves.

Using unstable software tools with sensitive security applications, you playing with other lives and money. FPC/Lazarus are tools for fun and learn, nothing else.  Over many decades is proven that each new "stable" version brings new bugs and regression. Who is fine with FPC/Lazarus is for them.

Payed commercial tools are no different, including Delphi, unless they are much more stable. I have personally bought one license only of suited target model, used to the version IDE quirks, fixed bugs in RTL  and VCL, used proven third-party libraries/components, made my own I needed  and used all while it was suitable. It was only serious RAD at the time on the market.

Never updated with newer version, if old worked correctly. If updated any, every single project had to check extensively before actually make it permanently.

Indeed, some comments here are so naive, that indicates only that the person which comment it never being professional programmer. Pathetic...

tr_escape

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 432
  • sector name toys | respect to spectre
    • Github:
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #28 on: January 16, 2019, 11:19:55 am »
Quote

Using unstable software tools with sensitive security applications, you playing with other lives and money. FPC/Lazarus are tools for fun and learn, nothing else.  Over many decades is proven that each new "stable" version brings new bugs and regression. Who is fine with FPC/Lazarus is for them.

Have you got any bugless and proven tools? I can find / create some bugs easyly.
If any device able to program by 3rd person can be broken.
No one give any warranty but after suitable tests you can say I couldn't find any bugs.


marcov

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 11383
  • FPC developer.
Re: Bite the bullet on Pascal/Lazarus?
« Reply #29 on: January 16, 2019, 11:43:07 am »
Your point of view is quite narrow and in the same time you are exceptionally rude and insinuating person. Especially being moderator - it seems you have to read basic forum rules by yourselves.

IMHO it was allowed since your statement was also awfully narrow. You can't make such sweeping statements without expecting some pushback.

Quote
Using unstable software tools with sensitive security applications, you playing with other lives and money.

Nearly no software tool allows to blindly pass on claims from users to compiler creator. IOW in a critical situation, you will have to do your own testing to guard against claims. If you don't do that, THEN you are playing with lives and money. So unstable or stable are arbitrary labels.

Of course validating a simple language might be easier, so for the most critical software only compilers that implement a relative straight dialect are used (nowadays usually C but 15-20 years ago, there was still quite some Modula2 usage), to aid validation. That this is not always true, is proven by the continued usage of Cobol :-)

Quote
FPC/Lazarus are tools for fun and learn, nothing else.  Over many decades is proven that each new "stable" version brings new bugs and regression. Who is fine with FPC/Lazarus is for them.

So is nearly any other tool. There are no guarantees. Validate a compiler, and then keep using it, is the only sane way.

Quote
Payed commercial tools are no different, including Delphi, unless they are much more stable. I have personally bought one license only of suited target model, used to the version IDE quirks, fixed bugs in RTL  and VCL, used proven third-party libraries/components, made my own I needed  and used all while it was suitable. It was only serious RAD at the time on the market.

Never ever updated with newer version, if old worked correctly. If updated any, every single project had to check extensively before actually make it permanently.

Delphi is riddled with bugs and traps too. YOu just learn to live with it. Which is why if you need to make a move for some reason, you need to discover the new ones of a new version (and even more so, since Delphi has quite large jumps)

My point was that if there is a reevaluation, it isn't always needed to exclude tools based on pretty arbitrary labels.

Quote
Indeed, the comments here are so naive here, that indicates only that the person which comment it never being professional programmer. Pathetic...

For embedded work, we mostly use Microchip. I'm currently evaluating moving from the old C30 compiler to the newer XC16 compiler, mostly because newer chips aren't supported by C30.

I'm having problems (a SPI bus init that looks good doesn't work anymore , while  mirrored code for a different bus just before does work, so it seems possibly place/timing related), but I haven't drilled down yet.  We do use NOPs to avoid raising the CS too early, so the compiler might deal with those differently.

So in short, I'm doing currently exactly what I was talking about, in a professional enviroment. Evaluating compilers. (there is no FPC backend for dspic btw). Admittedly, the goal is not medicin, and there won't be that many dead people when the lamp on a beerbottle inspection machine dies.  But beerbreweries and their bottle makers are big business, so it is not home automation either.

But a development engineer at Phillips Medical happens to be a neighbour, and we often confer about embedded matters.

There are many gradations in medical security, but also many changes to challenges. Nowadays they are increasingly moving to other embedded chips for new products because they must be (more) mobile (read battery powered and thus lowpower) and use different wireless interfaces. Preferably with options to do simple data transfer (e.g. from sensor to bluetooth) without waking up the core by connecting dma operations. This is mostly newer chip functionality.

Of course absolutely crucial lifesupport is wired and uses ancient software and tools that never change, but not much development is done with that either.

But these wireless products are commonly used in hospitals (though less so on the lifesupport/trauma departments). Phillips is of course less bound by tool cost due to their size, and won't select on tool price, but they do check on part functionality out of a wide portfolio, and have the ability to have parts customized, and therefore sometimes must migrate a line to a new chip/architecture and thus compiler.

Any idiot can dish out industry truths from embedded magazines, but the craft is carefully weighing options based on conditions, risks, time and availability.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2019, 11:48:20 am by marcov »

 

TinyPortal © 2005-2018