The Future of FPC

[Curt Carpenter]

FWIW Lazarus/FPC has done a remarkable job of not breaking my software as it has expanded and refined the system.  The discipline has been appreciated and we don't talk about it as much as we should.   

I wish I could say the same about Linux 

[440bx]

There are no fixed goals, no plans what will come, it simply depends on what the people contribute.

I can accept that's how it's being done but, does it have to be that way ?

I strongly believe that giving a little direction in the form of setting goals and accomplishing them is possible.   I realize that open source software is dependent on intellectual contributions and, as such, the feature set is more "malleable" than it is in a commercial product but, it seems to me that, if clear goals were set that would hopefully encourage contributors to fulfill them.  One goal in particular that I believe should be standard in all software development, open source or otherwise, is the goal of having as few bugs as possible which means fixing as many of them as possible.

Personally, why would I be interested in new features in a product that has bugs that already get in my way of getting things done ?  new features only mean new bugs which means _more_ bugs.  Why would anyone want that ???

I also believe that presetting some goals would cause the contributors to make a greater effort.  I believe that because, in that case, a clear progression towards a goal is measurable and that is a great incentive to contribute to make the goal happen.  Simply because most humans like to accomplish something positive/useful.   A preset set of objective would provide that.

Anyway... I don't want the above to give the impression that I am not grateful for your contribution and the contribution of many others towards making FPC a reality, I am.  I just want to emphasize that there are ways to obtain better results for everyone, users and developers.  Clear goals and a measurable progression towards their accomplishment is one of them.

[Martin_fr]

Both, commercial and open source, in all forms and flavours have come and gone, and of both some have stayed and are still at large.

And in all cases, the ones that remain and those that went: Some were sure bets, others complete surprises.

So everyone can have their guess here. Once a decade we can come back, and then those that guessed right get their chance for a "told you so".

Until then, the project is well alive right now. And hick ups and all, there seems to be strong interest, including by companies.
There are plenty of possible scenarios. (Way more than have been mentioned in all recent related threads on this forum).


To humour those who chose to only go for the latest inventions, and despite me myself being fully aware of the many flaws AI/LLM has with even answering just knowledge based queries.... Meaning, it is by no way a magic glass ball to see the future....

I did - for fun - ask: What is the future of free pascal:

The future of **Free Pascal** is best described as **stable, niche, and quietly sustainable**, rather than explosive or mainstream. Here’s a precise breakdown.

---

## 1. Project Health and Trajectory

Free Pascal (FPC) is **mature and actively maintained**. Development continues steadily, with regular releases, bug fixes, and platform updates. It is not in decline, but it is also not chasing trends like web-first or AI-first ecosystems.

**Key characteristics of its future:**

* Incremental improvements, not disruptive changes
* Strong backward compatibility
* Continued support for modern CPUs and operating systems

---

## 2. Relationship with Lazarus

The **Lazarus IDE** ecosystem remains the primary driver of visibility and adoption.

* Lazarus + FPC effectively fills the **“free Delphi”** niche
* Cross-platform GUI development (Windows, Linux, macOS) remains a core strength
* Long-term viability is tied to developers who want native desktop apps without managed runtimes

As long as Lazarus remains healthy, Free Pascal will remain relevant.

---

## 3. Competitive Position

Free Pascal occupies a **narrow but defensible niche**:

**Strong where it competes**

* Native code generation
* Small, fast executables
* Cross-compilation
* Long-lived codebases
* Low-level systems work (embedded, tooling, legacy maintenance)

**Weak where trends are moving**

* Web-first development
* Mobile-first ecosystems
* Large third-party package ecosystems
* Cloud-native workflows

This means it won’t displace languages like Rust, Go, or Python—but it doesn’t need to.

---

## 4. Delphi Compatibility and Legacy Value

Free Pascal continues to benefit from:

* Partial source compatibility with Delphi
* Organizations maintaining long-lived Pascal codebases
* Developers migrating away from **Embarcadero Technologies** licensing costs

This “exit ramp from Delphi” role is likely to persist for many years.

---

## 5. Community and Adoption Outlook

* Community size: **small but committed**
* Learning curve: **gentle, especially for structured/OOP programmers**
* New adopters: mostly hobbyists, educators, and maintainers of existing systems

It is unlikely to see mass new adoption among beginners, but it will continue to retain experienced users.

---

## 6. Long-Term Forecast (5–15 years)

**Very likely:**

* Continued maintenance and gradual evolution
* Ongoing use in desktop, tooling, embedded, and legacy systems
* Stable Lazarus/FPC releases

**Unlikely:**

* Mainstream revival
* Strong presence in web or mobile ecosystems
* Corporate-driven rapid innovation

---

## Bottom Line

Free Pascal’s future is **not about growth—it’s about longevity**.

It will remain:

* A reliable native compiler
* A safe choice for Pascal developers
* A practical alternative to Delphi
* A tool for people who value control, clarity, and stability over fashion

If you’re asking because you’re deciding whether to **start, continue, or migrate a project**, tell me which case applies—I can give a much more concrete recommendation.

[eny]

I did - for fun - ask: What is the future of free pascal:

You forgot to ask 'how to make free pascal more mainstream?'

Making Free Pascal more mainstream is possible — but it would require coordinated improvements in tooling, marketing, ecosystem, and developer experience.

For context, Free Pascal already has a strong technical base, and together with Lazarus it offers cross-platform native development. The issue isn’t capability — it’s visibility, ecosystem size, and modern appeal.

Here’s what would realistically move the needle:

1️⃣ Modernize the Developer Experience
Mainstream adoption depends heavily on first impressions.
Priorities:
* Official VS Code extension with first-class debugging and IntelliSense
* One-command project scaffolding (fpc new webapp)
* Built-in package manager (like Cargo, npm, pip)
* Simple cross-compilation workflows
* Better error messages (modern languages win here)

2️⃣ Pick a Strong Niche (Don’t Compete With Everything)
Trying to compete with Python or Java directly won’t work.

Better positioning could be:
* Lightweight native apps without bloat
* Embedded & low-level cross-platform
* Educational systems programming
* High-performance CLI tools
* Small-footprint desktop apps

Rust grew by owning “safe systems programming.” Go grew by owning “simple backend services.”

Free Pascal needs a clear identity.

3️⃣ Build a Modern Web Story
Mainstream languages today must address web development.
Possible approaches:
* Improve HTTP frameworks
* Simplify REST API creation
* Provide Docker templates
* Promote WebAssembly targets
* Official “FPC Web Starter Kit”

Right now, web dev is not strongly associated with Free Pascal.

4️⃣ Improve Learning & Documentation
Mainstream languages win because they are easy to learn.
Needed:
* Modern official website redesign
* Beginner-friendly tutorials
* Updated video courses
* YouTube presence
* Clear migration guide from Delphi
* Simple “Start Here” page

Compare this with:
* Python documentation
* Rust book ("The Rust Book")

Free Pascal documentation is powerful — but not beginner-optimized.

5️⃣ Improve Branding & Perception
Pascal has a reputation problem:
* Seen as “old”
* Associated with academia
* Compared to outdated Turbo Pascal era

But modern FPC is very capable.
Rebranding angle could be:
* “Modern native development without runtime bloat”
* “Small, fast, portable”
* “Native performance, zero VM”

6️⃣ Build Corporate / Industry Support
Mainstream languages often grow via:
* Corporate sponsorship
* Commercial tooling
* Companies using them publicly

Examples:
* Microsoft backing C#
* Google backing Go
* Mozilla backing Rust early on

Free Pascal lacks a strong commercial champion.

7️⃣ Make It Easy to Contribute
More contributors = faster evolution.
Needed:
* Clear roadmap
* Contributor onboarding docs
* Smaller “good first issue” tasks
* More visible GitHub activity

🚀 Realistic Outlook
Free Pascal will likely never dominate like Python or Java.
But it could realistically grow into:
* A respected systems / native niche language
* A strong embedded toolchain
* A lean alternative to C/C++
* A stable long-term maintenance language

⚖️ The Hard Truth
Becoming mainstream requires:
* Faster release cadence
* Strong marketing
* Modern ecosystem tools
* Clear identity
Without that, it will remain a powerful but niche compiler.

[Martin_fr]

Official VS Code extension with first-class debugging and IntelliSense

Ok, so that is "Make Free Pascal" more mainstream, but excludes Lazarus.

Also, while I don't know the "official" status, Joost has done that long ago.

* One-command project scaffolding (fpc new webapp)
* Built-in package manager (like Cargo, npm, pip)

We have scaffolding, just not for too many targets, and not for webapp.
We have OPM and FPPKG

Code: Pascal  [Select][+][-]

1. * Updated video courses
2. * YouTube presence

Done by contributors, and there are a few by now. This needs people who go there and watch it, and train the youtube algorithm to show it to more people. Associate it with other programming videos.

[440bx]

You forgot to ask 'how to make free pascal more mainstream?'

Very often A.I's answers are of dubious value but sometimes they can be surprisingly good and the one you got is in that category.


As far as environments go, I'd much rather use Lazarus than just about any other programming environment I've used.  The only reason I _tolerate_ using MS VS is because of its assembly level debugging and C/C++ only availability of many libraries and programming examples.

[Martin_fr]

The only reason I _tolerate_ using MS VS is because of its assembly level debugging

Have you tried: https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,68962.0.html

[440bx]

Have you tried: https://forum.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/topic,68962.0.html

I've been meaning to try it. 

I tried to get it going at one time but, it wasn't compatible with FPC v3.2.2 then and there was another little problem that prevented its successful installation which I believe has also been taken care of.

I know the author made it v3.2.2 compatible... therefore I should be able to try it now... I really need to get to it.

Thank you for the reminder.

[ALLIGATOR]

By the way, yes, FpDebug is second in my ranking of the coolest built-in debuggers (even without the CPUView extension, although it looks better with it), right after MSVisualStudio

Thanks, Martin!

What other IDEs do you think have such good debuggers?

[valdir.marcos]

By the way, FPC[main] is quite widely used in large, responsible commercial software
How is this possible? It's very simple: run various automatic tests on your software and its components to ensure that it works correctly

And you won't have any problems with FPC[main]

Although this is true in some companies, it's not as pretty as it seems.

The truth is that freezing [locally] the FPC Trunk/Main, removing certain parts, and keeping applying patches to get your commercial project viable is complex and hard workng. It requires skilled labor, time, and a bunch of money.

[marcov]

You forgot to ask 'how to make free pascal more mainstream?'

Very often A.I's answers are of dubious value but sometimes they can be surprisingly good and the one you got is in that category.

The trouble is that it talks about hard choices, and then still wants to do everything :-)