Apple leaving Intel for ARM - how will it affect Lazarus/FPC/Cocoa?

[Manlio]

In the next few days Apple is expected to announce that it will stop using Intel chips and move to its own ARM architecture.

Can anyone tell how is this going to affect Lazarus development for MacOS?

https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/06/13/apples-shift-to-arm-mac-from-intel-at-wwdc-will-define-a-decade-of-computing

[Jonas Maebe]

It's shouldn't affect FPC too much. FPC already supports AArch64 for iOS. Supporting it also for macOS shouldn't be difficult (once I have a machine to test/run it on).

[jwdietrich]

It's shouldn't affect FPC too much. FPC already supports AArch64 for iOS. Supporting it also for macOS shouldn't be difficult (once I have a machine to test/run it on).

That sounds great.

BTW, I don't think that they will completely abandon the Intel platform, at least in the short term. Rather, I would expect that they present an ARM-based MacBook as a missig link between the iPad and the professional Macs. If this is successfull they might consider a complete shift. But let's be surprised...

[skalogryz]

Rather, I would expect that they present an ARM-based MacBook as a missig link between the iPad and the professional Macs.

They have already done it with Mac Catalyst

[PierceNg]

It's shouldn't affect FPC too much. FPC already supports AArch64 for iOS. Supporting it also for macOS shouldn't be difficult (once I have a machine to test/run it on).

Does this mean FPC already runs on the PineBook Pro, which is a US$200 64-bit ARM Linux laptop?

[PascalDragon]

Does this mean FPC already runs on the PineBook Pro, which is a US$200 64-bit ARM Linux laptop?

With a correctly compiled FPC this should work. The 3.2.0RC1 contains a release for aarch64-linux that you can try. And Trunk has experimental support for aarch64-win64 as well.

[dieselnutjob]

by the way folks I'm still working on fpgui for native Cocoa as well.

[PierceNg]

Does this mean FPC already runs on the PineBook Pro, which is a US$200 64-bit ARM Linux laptop?

With a correctly compiled FPC this should work. The 3.2.0RC1 contains a release for aarch64-linux that you can try. And Trunk has experimental support for aarch64-win64 as well.

Cool, thanks. I've haven't pulled the trigger on the laptop yet. Mighty tempted.

[Leledumbo]

Rather, I would expect that they present an ARM-based MacBook as a missig link between the iPad and the professional Macs. If this is successfull they might consider a complete shift. But let's be surprised...

Their classic way is to introduce fat binaries, which could be actual fat binaries like in the past or a folder disguising as an app like today's app bundle. I'm taking my bet on the 2nd approach, it's the cheapest in implementation. Lazarus/FPC won't have difficulties either implementing it.

[skalogryz]

It's shouldn't affect FPC too much. FPC already supports AArch64 for iOS. Supporting it also for macOS shouldn't be difficult (once I have a machine to test/run it on).

shouldn't it introduce a conflict with "arm-darwin" target?
right now "arm-darwin" is arm-ios
while with the new ARM CPU, should "arm-darwin" become arm-macosx?

[Jonas Maebe]

Yes, we'll have to add a new target. I'll probably change to using ios for the ios targets (similar to how we already have iphonesim for iPhoneSimulator), and keep using darwin for all Mac OS X/OS X/macOS targets.

[skalogryz]

Yes, we'll have to add a new target. I'll probably change to using ios for the ios targets (similar to how we already have iphonesim for iPhoneSimulator), and keep using darwin for all Mac OS X/OS X/macOS targets.

That seems to be consistent with the entire family of targets Apple introduced: watchOS, tvOS and MacCatalyst.
same CPU (for catalyst it's x86_64), different OS

[jwdietrich]

It seems to be true. While continuing to sell (and even introduce) new Intel-based Macs they will present a series of ARM-based machines with impressing performance. See https://developer.apple.com.

[trev]

Yep, transitioning to all Apple Silicon for Mac computers within two years. Rosetta 2 to run Intel binaries on Apple Silicon.

Developers can apply to be selected to pay $US 500 to obtain an Apple Silicon-based (A12Z processor + 16G + 512G SSD) Mac mini for development.

[skalogryz]

Fat binaries and good old Rosetta

Developers can apply to be selected to pay $US 500 to obtain an Apple Silicon-based (A12Z processor + 16G + 512G SSD) Mac mini for development.

from here:

The program provides access to documentation, forums support, beta versions of macOS Big Sur and Xcode 12, and includes the limited use of a DTK, which will enable developers to build and test their Universal 2 apps. The DTK, which must be returned to Apple at the end of the program, consists of a Mac mini with Apple’s A12Z Bionic SoC inside and desktop specs, including 16GB of memory, a 512GB SSD, and a variety of Mac I/O ports. Developers can apply to the program at developer.apple.com, and the total cost of the program is $500.