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

Marco van de Voort marcov at stack.nl
Sat Dec 6 10:32:37 CET 2008

In our previous episode, Guillermo Martínez Jiménez said:
> > 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.
> I disagree.  C is better for write operating systems *by definition*:
> C was created to write UNIX, Pascal was created to learn good
> programming techniques.  C is low/mid-level language, Pascal is
> high-level (and Object Pascal is even higher):  OS are the lowest
> software level.

I don't see that at all. Sure original Pascal started and ended a bit
higher. But this is a Free Pascal list, and Free Pascal and Delphi can get
down and dirty too.

There sure isn't much in C that FPC can not do. And the few bits that miss
(if any) would probably be added soon when major OS development would start.

I think it is more a matter of FPC being geared towards apps development as
a compiler than a matter of language.

> I'm not saying it's impossible:  here you have MacOS and Toro. I'm
> just saying that _I think_ it isn't the best option.  Of course a
> better option is to write the kernel in C and Assembler and the
> utilities in Pascal and Object Pascal.

Well, it is a pity that there is so much routine discussion in this thread
that seems to boil down to a dogmatic kneejerk "C is better, C has always
been better, because Linux/Unix was programmed in it", and so little real
funded argumentation why this is really the case.

More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list