Recent

Author Topic: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?  (Read 20433 times)

JD

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1906
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #195 on: May 13, 2025, 01:05:28 pm »
I want to support you in that.
Lazarus is very suitable for such tasks.
Many people use mormot for that, but I personally didn't like its Variant approach and some other things.
So I wrote my own server on top of Synapse library and it works very fast, does not require installation of a managed environment (as for .NET Core), and in case of a commercial project is much more difficult to reverse-engineering.

I'm so glad to hear that  :D. I have servers in Indy and mORMot that run as native services/daemons and can also be containerized in Docker or Podman. Furthermore, I can assure you that nobody laughs when I can visible demostrate how Pascal can integrate a modern enterprise application stack, be more economical and sometimes outperform the shiny new toys. FPC is NOT resource hungry, and that is a good thing and a great selling point.
Linux Mint - Lazarus 4.0/FPC 3.2.2,
Windows - Lazarus 4.0/FPC 3.2.2

mORMot 2, PostgreSQL & MariaDB.

VisualLab

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 686
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #196 on: May 13, 2025, 01:06:28 pm »
Anyone foolish enough to get a computer in their brain will likely get all of their memories harvested by ai bots. Getting ddos attacks on brain would likely cause death.
Unfortunately, humanity will most likely have to integrate part of its brain with a shared knowledge database and with AI.

The database will definitely be useful. AI support (I prefer the term expert systems) can also be useful. However, a lot depends on the method (methods, technical solutions) of this integration. It will certainly not be widely available for a long time, due to the cost (and perhaps various risks).

And there are many preconditions for this. One of them is that the amount of knowledge required for normal life activity is becoming more and more with each generation. If ~500 years ago it was enough to be able to count and read/write to be an educated person. But now you have to spend 11 years in school (in my childhood only 10 years), then 5-6 years in university, and then only at ~24 years to start moving up the career ladder.

Because it is related to the development of civilization. That is why people specialize even within one field (mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc.).

For a woman's body in general, this is sometimes catastrophic. All doctors say that the biological time for a woman to conceive a healthy child is before the age of 25. What kind of study or career can she have then? Especially if she wants to have time to find a good husband and give birth to more than one child before 25.

In technologically advanced countries, women don't want to hear about having children. And as for potential husbands, they have astronomical demands. This is simply the result of the rise in the standard of living caused by technological development. Few are interested in challenges. It has always been that way.

Alexander the Great died at the age of ~32, having already conquered a large number of ancient states.
Jesus Christ died at the age of ~33, having become wise enough to change history for the next 2000 years and more.

Only that Alexander the Great was an adventurer. In his time, there were many like him (strong competition between leading males within one group but also between different groups in grabbing resources). Secondly, medicine was practically non-existent at that time.

As for Jesus - it is not known whether such a person existed, there are practically no traces, except the testimonies of his followers. But it is possible that there really was someone like that (those were the times when many different religious reformers appeared, not only of Judaism). And such people always had strong opponents. Suffice it to mention what Mani's fate was.

And today's university graduate is just starting their career at 24-25 years old. And if person is a doctor, then he/she still has 1-2 more years of internship to study.

Yes. As a result of civilization development, there has been an increase in knowledge. And this forces adaptation of those who want to actively participate in the life of the community.

Anthropologists say that the human body in general is originally designed for an maximum 40 years.
It was rare to live past 30. Either tribal warfare, or disease, or being killed by an animal while hunting, and so on.
And this is how our ancestors lived for hundreds of centuries. An indirect confirmation of this is teeth which in many people begin to seriously deteriorate after 40 years even if they are well cared for.
And women can and physiologically should give birth right from the age of 13-14. What kind of long study can there be?

Well, there are many different views related to human biology and anthropology. On the one hand, there is the problem of the physiology of the body, the wear and tear of organs, errors in the functioning of cells with age. On the other hand, there is the issue of the development and functioning of the brain. Recently, about 2 months ago, I watched an interesting podcast with a professor of neurology (prepared by a fairly young physicist, a popularizer of knowledge on YouTube). The professor talked about the issue of brain development, about the so-called brain maturation. That human brains mature quite late. The extension of life (including thanks to technical development, which allowed for the development of medicine) has facilitated the significant development of humanity over the last centuries. This was one of the factors (not the only one) that accelerated the development of humanity. As you rightly mentioned earlier, for many millennia, people rarely lived to the age of 40. As a result, they were not able to accumulate enough knowledge and then use it. From a certain point, very slowly, human life began to lengthen. But this started to happen only a few centuries ago.

We can change this either genetically (live ~300 years) or we can integrate learning directly into the brain via implants.
And I suspect that implants will appear sooner than genetic longevity.

But these are not the only ideas. There is also a third one - nanomachines. This is why biologists and biochemists study viruses and simple single-cell organisms. They look at how they are built. Because they want to create something (nanomachine) that could repair cells and consequently rebuild organ tissues. The road to this is very long, but research is being conducted.

VisualLab

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 686
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #197 on: May 13, 2025, 01:45:29 pm »
Because I am aware of what I am doing. You know very well that consciousness in different living organisms (insects, vertebrates, and in particular many mammals, primates and finally humans) has different degrees. You've gone way overboard with simplifying this issue.
I didn't overdo or simplify anything.
I was just following the logic of your postulates about blind evolution.

And about "different living organisms". Maybe You just think (hope) that you understand everything that is going on around you only because your intelligence is much greater than that of an ant. And you think that your products of life activity and your conclusions and knowledge about the world are something absolutely different.
 
In some religions it is called pride (at meaning of arrogance).
Because there may be entities in the universe that are smarter than you are as much as you are smarter than an ant.
And for them your products of life activity (including computers and Pascal) are no more than an anthill for an ant.

You didn't understand. Religion has nothing to do with what I wrote. There is also no need to invoke beings smarter than humans, who may or may not exist somewhere in deep space. It's about the scope and capabilities of humans and animals.

And one more thing - you use the term: theory. In the world of science, a theory is a description of a phenomenon or process that has been thoroughly studied...
A theory is a set of views, perceptions, ideas aimed at interpreting and explaining a phenomenon.

I once studied physics (long ago at university) and even know quite well some alternative approaches to explain many phenomena.
For example, the Big Bang theory. It is a theory, not a hypothesis. But it is based on a very flimsy basis. The “evidence” is strained. And what's more, modern cosmological research shows that there's no way this kind of universe could have expanded from a single point.
This “theory” in 200 years (and maybe even in our lifetime) will be as ridiculous as the medieval theory of a flat earth standing on three elephants and a tortoise.

Indeed, the ones you gave have many weak points. Because for now, no one knows how to confirm or disprove them. For now, physicists do not have the appropriate equipment and methods. Another thing is that physicists are not unanimous on certain issues (e.g. what gravity is, whether time exists).

Just check what size the smallest transistor currently ...
Purely experimentally, transistors are already trying to be made in several atomic layers.
But in fact, the speeds and distances in modern processors are such that electrons fly out of the conductors at sharp turns.

Yes. Except this is still about silicon. There are experiments with BN (boron nitride), with MoS (molybdenum sulphide). Switching to carbon would theoretically be beneficial, because the radius of a carbon atom is smaller than the radius of a silicon atom. Unfortunately, carbon has different physical properties from silicon, especially those that are important for people producing semiconductor elements. I think we all remember the period of fascination with graphene, but now it has died down a bit. Research is also being conducted on molecules that could act as a p-n junction.

It's hard to say what will happen in a few years. You can make assumptions, but they are always just speculation.
We are in this thread discussing why Pascal (Lazarus/Delphi) has fallen by the wayside despite all the efforts.
Do you have any "assumptions" or even "speculation" as to why?
Personally, the more I look at the remaining Pascal (Delphi/Lazarus) community, the sadder I get.
But I'm sure that you do not like my "speculation" about that (And I'm not talking about you).

Well. As long as Delphi and Lazarus are available, I use them (but not only these tools). What happens next, we'll see.

VisualLab

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 686
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #198 on: May 13, 2025, 01:47:19 pm »
Quote
Quote from: Joanna from IRC on May 12, 2025, 11:33:32 pm
Junk software has already captivated much of the population who can’t stop staring at their screens and pay attention to what is happening in the world around them. They are stupefied.

As others have already written in this thread: it is not planned, it is a result of laziness and lack of knowledge.

On the contrary, all the addictive apps on computers are carefully crafted to engage and influence people using the help of psychologists. It’s really just an extension of what was done with the advertising industry. I’ve heard stories of owners of tech companies not letting their own children have access to their products.

Don't overdo it. What about (say) Matlab, SolidWorks or MPLAB X IDE?

Joanna

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1429
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #199 on: May 13, 2025, 02:55:46 pm »
Visual lab there is a book called “shrinking the technosphere “ by dimitry orlov which is about how technology is destroying the planet. One of the things the technosphere wants is technocrats {Both men and women } who devote their entire lives to education and work and don’t bother to have families. I expect that the problem will correct itself as the people disappear.

Fibonacci brought up a good point. Having difficulty installing fpc/Lazarus as a new user could easily make someone give up on free pascal. Both Mac OS and Linux required tweaking before they would work. Difficult installation plus no real-time support is quite a deterrent.

Also Fibonacci, some people who use Lazarus ide only have 11 inch screens and it would be unusable if it was all in one piece.

440bx

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5479
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #200 on: May 13, 2025, 03:31:00 pm »
On the contrary, all the addictive apps on computers are carefully crafted to engage and influence people using the help of psychologists. It’s really just an extension of what was done with the advertising industry. I’ve heard stories of owners of tech companies not letting their own children have access to their products.
My education in Psychology is very limited but, it doesn't take being a Psychologist to figure out the primary cause of "app addiction".  Today's smartphones are used as phones likely less than 1% of the time they are used.  The rest of the time, that's 99%, they are used to send messages to someone or post something to facebook or some other social media thing. 

The one thing those actions have in common is the user's desire for personal attention.  THAT, is the driver and, it's genuinely _obvious_ just by watching what people do with their phones.  That also tells you why things like facebook are successful.  Of course, very few people will acknowledge their craving (and need) for personal attention, instead they will state that it is important to "network"  (yeah... sure!... of course, it's all about networking.)

That's probably why programming languages used to do hardcore things like writing an O/'S are popular.  There are programmers out there that have to have something in common with those hard core programmers, they believe it "reflects" positively on them to be using a language that "packs a punch". 

If Windows and Linux were written in Pascal there would be plenty of Pascal programmers around.
(FPC v3.0.4 and Lazarus 1.8.2) or (FPC v3.2.2 and Lazarus v4.0rc3) on Windows 7 SP1 64bit.

Joanna

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1429
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #201 on: May 13, 2025, 03:56:42 pm »
I’m not sure how much they are posting , from my experience the majority of people have always been lurkers. They are probably surfing the Internet or playing games or consuming media. Who knows.  :D

I think people enjoy the experience of being part of something. That “everyone else” is doing. Then again most of the internet is probably bots by now but it’s fun to fantasize isn’t it?

I think there are os  written in pascal I’m not sure how good they are.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2025, 12:00:28 am by Joanna from IRC »

PascalDragon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6008
  • Compiler Developer
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #202 on: May 13, 2025, 09:43:29 pm »
Some examples that C# can't do: In-kernel modules. Bare metal code. Amiga applications.
In-kernel modules sane programmers write in C (even without ++) or even assembly language but not Pascal.
Bare metal code - I can agree, but you can use C libraries for that too.
Amiga applications?!! Who needs that for serious business in the year 2025? You might as well remember the ancient prehistoric ZX-Spectrum  :D

You were the one who asked what's possible with FPC/Lazarus, but not in C#. It does not matter whether you think it's a good idea or not, it's nevertheless possible.

And guess what? The LCL supports the Amiga GUI library. And FPC supports the ZX-Spectrum. ;)

Lenny33

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 49
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #203 on: May 13, 2025, 11:22:03 pm »
You didn't understand. Religion has nothing to do with what I wrote. There is also no need to invoke beings smarter than humans, who may or may not exist somewhere in deep space. It's about the scope and capabilities of humans and animals.
I can say that it's you who doesn't understand.
First, religion or faith has everything to do with it.
If you believe in some kind of “blind evolution” (that's your definition) then that's exactly what you believe in.
Because at least the theory of evolution in its classical form is still unproven.
But if you believe in it, then you yourself and all the products of your life (including our beloved Pascal) are also products of “blind evolution”.
And then race to develop more powerful and CPU/Memory-greedy applications is also a part of blind evolutionary mechanism.
What's not logical here? Everything is logical.
It's just that somehow in this scheme of yours you think you're special. No, you don't.
You just won the race in “blind evolution” and got sick with pride (arrogance).

And what you say about humans not only obeying instincts is even easier to explain.
Humans are social animals (like ants are social insects) and cannot survive alone without society.
Therefore, people are forced to obey the general rules of coexistence, and not only their personal wild instincts.
Insects are just more primitive and just so programmed by “blind evolution” originally.

But if tomorrow it turns out that the creationists are right, only then can you claim that you were indeed right from the begining designed in a special way to be different from animals.

Let's finish with this offtopic.
We won't change the fact that tomorrow programs will be even more demanding on memory and CPU and nobody will care about it anyway.
And back to the topic - the fact that Lazarus programs are less demanding on memory will not attract anyone except those who are involved in embedded solutions for controllers.

Well. As long as Delphi and Lazarus are available, I use them (but not only these tools). What happens next, we'll see.
That's the position with which any technology should and can be used. But only if you yourself determine what technology to use and do not depend on other people.
I also use Lazarus for certain tasks (I already wrote for which ones).
But if I had an order to create a corporate application from scratch, I would hardly choose Lazarus or Delphi as the main development tool. I would even have a hard time finding an employee.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2025, 11:26:55 pm by Lenny33 »

Lenny33

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 49
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #204 on: May 13, 2025, 11:52:06 pm »
And guess what? The LCL supports the Amiga GUI library. And FPC supports the ZX-Spectrum. ;)
So where are wrong the opponents of “Joanna from IRC” who say that Lazarus is only for old people?
They are right then.
Then Lazarus is a toy for nostalgic for Pascal and ZX-Spectrum retirees who are bored on retirement and therefore write Pascal programs for a rusty ZX-Spectrum while listening to Boney M / Led Zeppelin / Frank Sinatra / ...  music on a tape recorder.
 :D
« Last Edit: May 14, 2025, 12:20:52 am by Lenny33 »

Lenny33

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 49
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #205 on: May 14, 2025, 12:05:00 am »
If Windows and Linux were written in Pascal there would be plenty of Pascal programmers around.
BTW some interesting attempts to create an OS or something similar to an OS on FPC:
Toro Kernel
fp-rtos
Ultibo


As for Ultibo I even interested to try it for my Raspberry Pi



JanRoza

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 718
    • http://www.silentwings.nl
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #206 on: May 14, 2025, 12:06:39 am »
It would be nice if everyone would stay on topic and not insult each other or tell all kind of conspiracy theories.
Then this topic may become interesting to read again.  >:(
OS: Windows 11 / Linux Mint 22.1
       Lazarus 4.0 RC FPC 3.2.2
       CodeTyphon 8.70 FPC 3.3.1

Joanna

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1429
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #207 on: May 14, 2025, 12:12:16 am »
Quote
I also use Lazarus for certain tasks (I already wrote for which ones).
But if I had an order to create a corporate application from scratch, I would hardly choose Lazarus or Delphi as the main development tool. I would even have a hard time finding an employee.
You must not like pascal very much if you would pass up an opportunity to support fpc and hire pascal programmers {even if you need to train them}

munair

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 884
  • compiler developer @SharpBASIC
    • SharpBASIC
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #208 on: May 14, 2025, 12:13:31 am »
I think there are os  written in pascal I’m not sure how good they are.

https://wiki.freepascal.org/Operating_Systems_written_in_FPC

The first MAC OS was also partially written in Pascal along with 68k assembler.
It's only logical.

Lenny33

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 49
Re: Why isn't Lazarus / Free Pascal more popular?
« Reply #209 on: May 14, 2025, 12:34:50 am »
You must not like pascal very much if you would pass up an opportunity to support fpc and hire pascal programmers {even if you need to train them}
I'm being pragmatic about this.
Of course it was much easier for me to translate an old project from Delphi to Lazarus to make it cross-platform than to rewrite it from scratch in C++ Qt or try to do something in .NET Core and very crude Avalonia.
But my other newer project is on .NET Core and Blazor.
And among other things, I still using Lazarus in some backend. Although no one else understand it but me.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2025, 12:40:10 am by Lenny33 »

 

TinyPortal © 2005-2018