Z80 was only added in main (so calling it “old baggage” is wrong), but even then there are people who welcomed it. I know at least one user who welcomed the z80-msxdos port, because there only TP 3.0 exists. And Amiga is also actively used by various users, most importantly Alb42. Also once a code generator is working maintaining it and adding new targets is a small effort. Main maintenance is the parser.
I see your point, and I agree that supporting additional targets can be valuable, especially when the maintenance overhead is low. From my perspective, though, it often makes sense to prioritise what benefits the majority of users.
In my own projects, I occasionally get requests for niche features that only one person would use, and in those cases I usually decline to keep things simple and maintainable. A compiler is obviously a different kind of project, and as you said, adding targets may not be that costly once the groundwork is there.
That said, if it were up to me, I’d probably still lean towards focusing effort on the most widely used platforms. But I understand this is an open-source project, and the team may value broader platform support for different reasons, including experimentation and community interest.
They are not ignored. It's simply that life happened. The last two months and the next few weeks I'm extremely busy with topics completely outside of FPC and there's still one issue in your changes where I wanted to make sure that this doesn't negatively affect x86_64-win64.
That’s good to hear, I’m glad it hasn’t been forgotten.
If I may suggest one thing, a short update would go a long way in situations like this — even something brief like “I’m currently busy, will get back to this soon.” When someone has invested a significant amount of time and effort, a bit of feedback helps avoid the impression that their work has been overlooked.
Recent
