Lazarus C++ Builder?

[Rave]

Would be neat if we could make Lazarus compiler-independent and have a version that can be used with C++ (either gcc or MSVC on Windows). There are plenty of C++ IDEs but none have the same feel as Borland tool and very few are even RAD.

Plus, having access to LCL on the C++ side would be really cool.

[Remy Lebeau]

Would be neat if we could make Lazarus compiler-independent and have a version that can be used with C++
...
Plus, having access to LCL on the C++ side would be really cool.

Do you realize how much work goes into making Delphi's RTL/VCL/FMX frameworks be compatible with C++Builder?  A lot of effort, including many custom language extensions that have to be added to the C++ compiler itself just to make that possible.  Even though C++Builder is moving towards being fully clang-based, it is a highly-customized clang, you can't just download the stock clang from online and use it as-is.  Now imagine having to do that with other C++ compilers, too.

FreePascal/Lazarus isn't even up to speed on all of the latest Delphi features, and you want to mix in a whole new language and supporting ecosystem?  Good luck.

[MarkMLl]

Would be neat if we could make Lazarus compiler-independent and have a version that can be used with C++ (either gcc or MSVC on Windows). There are plenty of C++ IDEs but none have the same feel as Borland tool and very few are even RAD.

Plus, having access to LCL on the C++ side would be really cool.

Yes, it would. Or more to the point, support something like Rust which doesn't have the antipathy towards anything Pascal-related so often seen in the C/C++ community, and is crying out for a good RAD solution.

However it's not going to happen: discussion in the past has concluded that the IDE is too-deeply entwined with Object Pascal, and the reverse engineering required to get everything up to an adequate standard of documentation and "explainability" is prohibitive.

MarkMLl

[VisualLab]

This is a completely idiotic idea. However, lest there be any accusation that this is just malice without any arguments...

Would be neat if we could make Lazarus compiler-independent and have a version that can be used with C++ (either gcc or MSVC on Windows).

The key arguments (purely technical) against this idea were given by Remy Lebeau and MarkMLI. But there are others arguments.

There are plenty of C++ IDEs but none have the same feel as Borland tool and very few are even RAD.

There used to be wxDevC++, interestingly written in Object Pascal

Currently, the only RAD for C++ with capabilities comparable to C++ Builder is Qt Creator. It is closely linked to the Qt library. And for good reason. C++ is full of oddities and annoyances and is also very archaic (current fixes and additions for this language are more attempts to patch up old and stupid ideas than innovative and groundbreaking solutions). It is interesting that RADs for Object Pascal (Delphi, Lazarus), Java (NetBeans, Eclipse) and C# (Visual Studio, SharpDevelop <- unfortunately, no longer developed) were created so long ago. And for C++ there is only Qt Creator, which is completely based on unusual solutions present in the Qt library (in particular tools run before the compiler).

Plus, having access to LCL on the C++ side would be really cool.

No, it wouldn't be cool. Look at the source files for the VCL and FMX C++ Builder library. Also look at the Qt library files (or its documentation). C++ code is always more confusing than Object Pascal code (e.g. peppered with various casts, weird templates, etc.). Furthermore, C++ doesn't support some types present in Object Pascal. And they are used in many places in RTL, FCL and LCL (the latter uses the former two). Unfortunately, you have to accept what C++ is like. And don't expect it to be different - it's just "developed by a committee".