<HTML>
<div><style> BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }</style>I can't speak for the senior developers, but I think there's a preference that backwards compatibility is maintained, at least between versions of FPC if not Delphi. At least my preference is to attempt to better support the existing FPC - for example, I tend to do a lot of work and research into x86-64 assembly language, including compiler algorithms that attempt to use the full MM registers where possible.</div><div><br>
</div><div>I think if you want to truly design a new language, or a new dialect of Pascal (as you are implying), it might be best to start with a prototype to showcase its merits.<br>
<br>
I don't know much about Rust so I probably can't help you too much, and my mindset with programming very much belongs in the 90s unfortunately, as while I attempt to write cross-platform code, I'm not afraid to drop into raw assembly language if there's a potential speed benefit.<br>
<br>
I suppose one 21st Century desire of not so much the language, but the compiler, is the ability to fully utilise modern CPU features like the AVX instruction set and the FMA instructions, but still be able to drop back to SSE2 if compatibility is a major concern.</div><div><br>
</div><div>Just my thoughts.<br>
</div><div><br>
</div><div>Gareth aka. Kit<br>
</div><br>
<br>
<br>
<span style="font-weight: bold;">On Fri 15/02/19 05:28 , James via fpc-devel fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org sent:<br>
</span><blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT: #F5F5F5 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT:0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px"><div>I'm interested in starting (or joining) a discussion on the next
(*non* backwards compatible) version of FPC. Instead of being
classically object oriented, there is merit in examining a model with
ad-hoc polymorphism like Rust.<br>
</div><div><br>
</div><div>Strongest features of Pascal (in my opinion):<br>
</div><div> 1. Code readability<br>
</div><div> 2. Strong typing<br>
</div><div> 3. Quick compilation.<br>
</div><div> 4. ???<br>
</div><div> <br>
</div><div>Strongest features of Rust (from wikipedia):<br>
</div><div> 1. Memory safety (no null pointers, no dangling pointers, no data races in safe code)<br>
</div><div> 2. Memory management with "resource acquisition is initialization"<br>
</div><div> 3. Ownership rules favorable for safety<br>
</div><div> 4. Ad-hoc polymorphism (traits) [instead of traditional OOP class inheritance]<br>
</div><div> 5. ???<br>
</div><div><br>
</div><div>Other features worth investigation:<br>
</div><div> 1. Syntax for parallel math (SIMD)<br>
</div><div> 2. Syntax and methodology for parallel algorithms dispatch (GPU via Vulkan, RISC-V coprocessors, etc.)<br>
</div><div> 3. ???<br>
</div><div><br>
</div><div>So,
what features are desirable for a 21st century programming language in
this world of multiple cores? I think a clean slate new language "done
the Pascal way" would be beneficial.<br>
</div><div><br>
</div><div>Could someone with knowledge of both Pascal and Rust elucidate the advantages of both languages?<br>
</div><div><br>
</div><div>Is there interest in combining the syntax of Pascal with the features of Rust et al. to create the next version of FPC?<br>
</div><div><br>
</div><div>Thanks!<br>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
fpc-devel maillist - <a href="mailto:fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org">fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org</a><br>
<a target="_blank" href="<a href="http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel">http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel</a>"><span style="color: red;">http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel</span></a><br>
<br>
</blockquote></HTML>