[fpc-devel] Re: [fpc-l] type discussion
Marco van de Voort
marcov at stack.nl
Thu Jun 2 17:53:27 CEST 2005
> > I totally agree with you in this case - we dont want or need cryptic c
> > stlye syntax in any version of Pascal.
> > However, in general Pascal has poor developer productivity when compared
> > to modern languages like python and C#.
> I'am a poor delphi programmer, didn't use it for years, but I bet with any
> python programmer that I create any application faster than him :)
The opinion that Python is so fast is mainly based on tinkerers. So it is
simply true. Trial and error programming is for small programs always faster,
and Pascal doesn't help with that.
However IMHO is that a problem of Python/C#, not Pascal. Or actually it is
a big problem for IT managers ;-)
And then people wonder why the avg IT project doesn't make the deadline.
> > object pascal whereas pascal
> Well, I wonder which languages the kernel, X windows, GNOME, KDE, OpenOffice,
> Mozilla etc. use ;), definitively not python ... Python is a usuable scripting
> language but nothing more.
If I see what python is used for on my system than that is application
scripting and distribution-related tools (pkg management etc). Not one really
Python is not a brick in the wall of development, but more like hole filler.
> > on linux is virtually non-existant.
> The problem with pascal on linux was/is that there was no good compiler in
> the 90s for linux so a lot developers got lost.
The educational stigma also hurt pretty bad, even though untrue. This was
indeed not helped by the relative late arrival of 32-bit Borland compilers.
> > 2) I have touched on manual memory managaement of tobjects before so I
> > wont rehash it here (in summary ref count tobjects and they should have
> > good performance with c++ style exception handling).
This is impossible:-)
> Good performance like python ;)?
That is doable :-)
More information about the fpc-devel