Lazarus
Miscellaneous => Other => Topic started by: guest64953 on December 15, 2019, 03:08:45 pm
-
You're very similar. Both build a static binary best suited for running inside containers (Docker, Kubernetes,...). But if you wanted to archive that, you have to stop being a shadow of Delphi. You have to add new language features to match Go's and improve IDE support. The Lazarus IDE now, IMO, just a shadow of old version of RAD Studio, and only suitable to develop drag and drop GUI application. It currently not even good for command line application, let alone this kind of application :-X
-
Do you want to continue the safe path, which is a free Delphi compatible compiler like what Liberty Eiffel is to Eiffel Studio, or changing yourself to be something different? If you want to change, you should invest on the correct path. I think you have great potential to be a real competitor of Golang. System programming is the homeland of C, so I think I should stop dreaming about a day we could have Pascal as a system language, side to side with C, to develop drivers, kernel modules,... The Go's path, to be the container's language is more realistic for us. If you still waste time for debating between C syntax and Pascal synax which is better, I think you should continue with the safe way and drop all of new language proposals, because it only make the language looks to be weird, but not actually improve it. This is MHO, listen or ignore it is up to you. Bye :-*
-
@hunghung, FPC / Lazarus is open source project. You can improve it and make it better.
-
As far as I know GO is proven to be solvable.
I am not aware of any board game called Pascal.
-
Do you want to continue the safe path, which is a free Delphi compatible compiler like what Liberty Eiffel is to Eiffel Studio
Yes. Because that is a course agreed on by the bulk of the users and developers. They need it.
, or changing yourself to be something different?
But that doesn't mean something else is different. Just fork and start. If it is all such glorious thingy, many people will join you.
If you want to change, you should invest on the correct path.
Who says what we are doing is not the correct path? And what is a correct path? How do you judge the correct path?
I think you have great potential to be a real competitor of Golang. System programming is the homeland of C, so I think I should stop dreaming about a day we could have Pascal as a system language, side to side with C, to develop drivers, kernel modules,... The Go's path, to be the container's language is more realistic for us. If you still waste time for debating between C syntax and Pascal synax which is better, I think you should continue with the safe way and drop all of new language proposals, because it only make the language looks to be weird, but not actually improve it.
Well, of course Go is being pushed ad nauseam by Google. Both sponsoring, as being used in their daily business. What do you have to equalize that balance? A few billion in the bank maybe?
We could of course start to develop one of two pascal kernel modules, but really, who would use them?
This is MHO, listen or ignore it is up to you. Bye :-*
Think deeper :-)
-
This is MHO, listen or ignore it is up to you. Bye :-*
Before I ignore it just one question:
Why is none of the Go compilers written in Go?
Think about it!
Winni
-
This is MHO, listen or ignore it is up to you. Bye :-*
Before I ignore it just one question:
Why is none of the Go compilers written in Go?
Think about it!
Winni
Give your answer.
-
Why is none of the Go compilers written in Go?
The default compiler, gc, is included with the Go distribution as part of the support for the go command. Gc was originally written in C because of the difficulties of bootstrapping—you'd need a Go compiler to set up a Go environment. But things have advanced and since the Go 1.5 release the compiler has been a Go program.
https://golang.org/doc/faq#What_compiler_technology_is_used_to_build_the_compilers (https://golang.org/doc/faq#What_compiler_technology_is_used_to_build_the_compilers)
However, I'd still suggest that somebody inclined to propose substantial changes to either the Pascal language or to the aims and management of the FPC/Lazarus projects would be in a far more persuasive position if he had a robust history of fixing bugs and cooperating with the core team. Or put another way, talk is cheap but learning how to design a language and implement a compiler isn't.
MarkMLl
-
However, I'd still suggest that somebody inclined to propose substantial changes to either the Pascal language or to the aims and management of the FPC/Lazarus projects would be in a far more persuasive position if he had a robust history of fixing bugs and cooperating with the core team. Or put another way, talk is cheap but learning how to design a language and implement a compiler isn't.
THIS ;D
-
However, I'd still suggest that somebody inclined to propose substantial changes to either the Pascal language or to the aims and management of the FPC/Lazarus projects would be in a far more persuasive position if he had a robust history of fixing bugs and cooperating with the core team. Or put another way, talk is cheap but learning how to design a language and implement a compiler isn't.
MarkMLl
Hey, every task is easy if you're asking someone else to do it. :)
And we know for sure that all these changes would rake in the users and the big bucks. (Of course, no one ever considers that all of the supposed users who will then flock to the new product won't have their own "hey, it would be great if you just added ..." needs).
-
Three things I've "learned" on this forum:
- C and C++ are only used for icky things like operating systems
- Go is a great language
- Go IS a language
-
Sorry, I know talk is cheap, just show the code so you would review or possibly merge it, or just creating a fork. But with my ability, it's impossible for me to do anything other than talk and lobby. And I think I have lobbied the wrong way, so it has the reverse effect. Everyone hate me now, think of me as a spammer or some trouble maker. Sorry, everyone. I think I should go now :)
-
Hey, every task is easy if you're asking someone else to do it. :)
But it's the way it is. This project is developed by users in their free time. People follow their interests (e.g. Florian improving the optimization, Jonas implementing the LLVM backend, me playing around in the parser). If someone wants "Fancy Feature XY" that is of no interest to any of us then they need to go into the initiative, whether this means to implement it themselves or to motivate some third developer to implement it.
And providing someone direct commit access to "our baby" requires trust. Trust that is established by someone providing patches, showing that they care and know how to work together with an established team.
-
Everyone hate me now, think of me as a spammer or some trouble maker. Sorry, everyone. I think I should go now :)
Not everyone... It is probably very few people, if anyone at, that "hate" you.
Just your idea wasn't liked.
And with the amount of such "ideas" / "lobbying attempts" coming in, reactions are anywhere between annoyed and amused (including maybe a few responses, actually giving proper pro and contra)
-
But it's the way it is. This project is developed by users in their free time. People follow their interests (e.g. Florian improving the optimization, Jonas implementing the LLVM backend, me playing around in the parser).
And me being a pain in the collective backside of the core developers for the last 15 years or so :-)
Seriously: it's not just that writing a compiler is a big job, it's that /particularly/ when it extends an existing language it's not something that can really be done in one fell swoop: it has to grow organically and build on what came before it.
It's easy enough to build a language and compiler from scratch: that's exactly what Go does. Similarly, it's easy enough to build an operating system from scratch and to offer limited backward compatibility: that's what Windows NT did (and it took another ten years before a sufficient proportion of developers had been taught the error of their ways that it could go mainstream).
But to build something on a venerable language like Pascal that doesn't break backward compatibility is a massive job. And while I criticise Pascal and regret a couple of things left out of it (when compared with ALGOL) and now derided as "too C-like" I do have to defend FPC's core developers since by now their "gut feeling" that some change would either break the language or would require sufficient reimplementation that there would almost certainly be serious bugs- and some of us do actually use this compiler for serious work- has to be respected.
@hunghung: Don't feel bad. Get involved, learn the ropes, learn to distinguish between what's easy and what's not so easy. And just to put things in context, PascalDragon's port of the compiler so that it can use the low-level Windows NT API (normally available for device drivers etc.) is one of the simpler things he and his colleagues have done.
MarkMLl
-
But it's the way it is. This project is developed by users in their free time. People follow their interests (e.g. Florian improving the optimization, Jonas implementing the LLVM backend, me playing around in the parser).
And me being a pain in the collective backside of the core developers for the last 15 years or so :-)
At least since 06/02/02:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.modula2/DmRsV52YLb8
or is this the recruitment ? :-)
Afaik we came onto c.l.m2 about the same time (1994-1995 ?), and you might have submitted bugs/comments to my xtdlib library. So that would make it 25 years already :-)
-
I am looking forward to the new year already. The core team have birth dates close to unix time start (1-1-1970) .....
-
At least since 06/02/02:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.modula2/DmRsV52YLb8
or is this the recruitment ? :-)
Afaik we came onto c.l.m2 about the same time (1994-1995 ?), and you might have submitted bugs/comments to my xtdlib library. So that would make it 25 years already :-)
My goodness, that's going back some :-) In '95 I was in the middle of a demanding project developing a microkernel in Modula-2 (16-bit x86 protected mode, debugged using a Tek logic analyser until it could report usefully on its own exceptions) with large chunks of the same code also running on Z80. And I wrote the boot ROMs as well, and the binder that converted TopSpeed DLLs into a PM binary. So I suppose that does give me a bit of a pedigree :-)
We were certainly discussing FPC by mail in '04. I've just checked and it was Vincent who logged into one of our SPARC-based systems to get Lazarus going but that wasn't until late '08 (a mere 11 years or so).
MarkMLl
-
If you want to change, you should invest on the correct path. I think you have great potential to be a real competitor of Golang.
I do not represent the whole community. But I believe not much or maybe no one here care to compete with Golang. Maybe not to compete, but we care more about Java, Python, C/++ because their have huge user base. I don't mean Golang is bad but they're #2 from the bottom:
https://www.benfrederickson.com/ranking-programming-languages-by-github-users/
The Lazarus IDE now, IMO, just a shadow of old version of RAD Studio, and only suitable to develop drag and drop GUI application. It currently not even good for command line application, let alone this kind of application :-X
Did you meant console applications? Lazarus can be used to build console applications. If you're having issue with it, just let us know. It can be a bug or maybe you did it wrong, people here will guide it how to do it correctly.
But with my ability, it's impossible for me to do anything other than talk and lobby. And I think I have lobbied the wrong way, so it has the reverse effect. Everyone hate me now, think of me as a spammer or some trouble maker. Sorry, everyone. I think I should go now :)
I'm not sure about the others, but not everyone hate you. After some deep analyzing I believe you're not a spammer. And I really enjoy reading your posts. They usually have catchy titles and the things that most others won't say. Please, don't go, I'll miss you.
Here are some tips if you want to improve your lobby power:
Contribute to the community, it is very hard for a new user just pop up and ask changes. Do some research before saying something. When I said Go doesn't have large user base compare to Java, Python, C/++, I really showed a link to prove it. As someone already mentioned it, being sponsored with money can make a big different. The community need manpower, many of your suggestions are actually good, but people are doing the things they're thinking more important to them. Money can attract manpower. If you really need new features and you need it quick, you can post bounties.
-
We were certainly discussing FPC by mail in '04. I've just checked and it was Vincent who logged into one of our SPARC-based systems to get Lazarus going but that wasn't until late '08 (a mere 11 years or so).
The pun being meant is that you possibly "bothered" one developer before either of our FPC involvements :D. And that above link about us discussing FPC is from 2002.
-
The Lazarus IDE now, IMO, just a shadow of old version of RAD Studio, and only suitable to develop drag and drop GUI application. It currently not even good for command line application, let alone this kind of application :-X
Did you meant console applications? Lazarus can be used to build console applications. If you're having issue with it, just let us know. It can be a bug or maybe you did it wrong, people here will guide it how to do it correctly.
I want to second that. If there are weaknesses it's in the Lazarus console output window, but a lot of those can be circumvented by attaching to a running program.
MarkMLl
-
As far as I know GO is proven to be solvable.
I am not aware of any board game called Pascal.
I beg your pardon, but I could not understand your opinion. Could you elaborate it a bit more?
-
As far as I know GO is proven to be solvable.
I am not aware of any board game called Pascal.
I beg your pardon, but I could not understand your opinion. Could you elaborate it a bit more?
It's a joke.
You can compete in the boardgame named "go", but until a game called "pascal" is invented, you cannot compete in it.
Bart
-
As far as I know GO is proven to be solvable.
I am not aware of any board game called Pascal.
I beg your pardon, but I could not understand your opinion. Could you elaborate it a bit more?
It's a joke.
You can compete in the boardgame named "go", but until a game called "pascal" is invented, you cannot compete in it.
Bart
Thanks, Bart.
I know Thaddy is Dutch, but his English [people] humor is not easy to understand outside Europe.
-
I know Thaddy is Dutch, but his English [people] humor is not easy to understand outside Europe.
Not just there...
Bart
-
I know Thaddy is Dutch, but his English [people] humor is not easy to understand outside Europe.
Not just there...
Bart
In his defense, I have to say that to us Monty Python fans he makes perfect sense :P
-
@hunghung: Don't feel bad. Get involved, learn the ropes, learn to distinguish between what's easy and what's not so easy. And just to put things in context, PascalDragon's port of the compiler so that it can use the low-level Windows NT API (normally available for device drivers etc.) is one of the simpler things he and his colleagues have done.
It even was one of the first contributions I did to FPC (see here (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=14886) and here (https://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=14887))... good times 8-)