[fpc-pascal] Porting linux to pascal, would it be possible ?

Ingemar Ragnemalm ingemar at ragnemalm.se
Fri Dec 5 17:40:39 CET 2008

Leonardo M. Ram? <martinrame at yahoo.com> wrote:

> --- On Fri, 12/5/08, Guillermo Martínez Jiménez <gmjimen at burdjia.com> wrote:
>> By the way, Linux is good as it is now and Pascal isn't the best
>> option to create an operating system.
> Are you sure? doesn't older MacOS's versions where written in Object Pascal?

Yes, and there's nothing wrong with Pascal for an OS. It would be excellent.

> I think the problem here (again) is not the language, it's the critical mass of users of the language. Using C for Linux was a good bet, not because the language is good (Pascal is way better for me), but because C has a wider user base who can fix/add features.

Using C for Linux was the only way, because there was a free C compiler 
(GCC) and none for Pascal or other comparable languages. Things have 
changed since then, but much of the software industry is on a path 
decided from the situation 20 years ago. The industry took the C route 
since there was no cross-platform Pascal, while Linux made the choice 
from available free software. Now everything must have inherited design 
flaws from C just because of what was available in the 80's. That is, 
unless the tide changes. It can happen.

"Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho" <felipemonteiro.carvalho at gmail.com> wrote:
> My open source project, for example, the Virtual Magnifying Glass,
> suffers in linux because KDE only wishes to distribute C++/Qt software
> and Gnome only distributes C and C# software, so it get's hard to be
> popular.

Now, that sounds like one real problem, related to the porting issue, 
which we can address. And not that doesn't need as much work.

So the KDE and Gnome projects are language-locked? (How? Surely users 
don't select software by language? Or are the distros incomplete, 
FPC-wise? Hard to recompile?) Anyway. that sounds bad! And that suggests 
a much shorter path: Adapt a distribution to "Pascal Gnome" support, 
with full Pascal interfaces and code, or whatever is missing. Port Gnome 
examples, if it isn't already done, and show that Pascal (FPC) is not 
only an option but a *better* solution. Easier than C/C++, faster than 
Java, much faster than Python... I don't know if an FPC-tuned distro 
would make any difference, stronger FPC support in, say, Ubuntu, would 
make a bigger impact. Acceptance of FPC sounds like a good goal to me.

Who isn't distributing? Gnome? That isn't a distribution. I don't quite 
understand what you mean.

The "FPC OS" doesn't have to be 100% written in FPC, not even 10%. No 
hurry. The C code is ugly but it works as long as you don't take GCC 
out. Port what really counts, making it possible and well supported to 
write *new* programs in FPC.


More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list