[fpc-pascal] Pascal dialect -- was: Re: fpc-pascal Digest, Vol 72, Issue 12

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, spir wrote:

> On Fri, 4 Jun 2010 13:21:09 +0200 (CEST)
> Michael Van Canneyt <michael at freepascal.org> wrote:
>
>> And to be honest, I think we do a very good job of it. Yes, we don't have
>> 100% compatibility. But no, it's never 100%. But it is certainly good
>> enough to satisfy most people that need it.
>
> Hello, Michael!
>
> No doubt about this. And I take the opportunity to thank you (and all
> others) for this great (and huge) project.  What I question is the
> necessity to keep Delphi-compliance now and for ever.  And the consequent
> choice of _not_ making, progressively, a free (object) Pascal dialect,
> with its own design & principles, style & taste, and so on...  (*) Sure, I
> also understand the great advantage of reusing Delphi code and cloning its
> libraries, esp.  for production code.  But after so long, fpc could
> already have a relevant shared codebase, don't you think?  (what by the
> way GNU PAscal does not have).  How old is freepascal already, 10 years?

More. 15-16 years.

>
> Denis
>
> (*) For instance, I have had a look at GNU Pascal, and via this look
> discovered standard & extended Pascal design.  I must say that on numerous
> points it looks better to me than TP & Delphi choices; standards were
> obviously very carefully designed.  An FP freed of Delphi chains could
> take the best of this.  "Free" also means free ;-) Another point is the
> terrible library/unit mess, partially inherited from Borland pascal
> history, partially increased by compiler modes.  Very hard to find what
> one looks for (except maybe if coming from BP).  More or less, anything
> can hide anywhere; and there are variants of any feature; and many are
> just legacy from the 80's.  (I don't even evoke the global namespace.)
> Severe, radical, cleanup needed, imo.  ________________________________

There is no global namespace; there is a per-unit namespace if you care to
use it. It existed before the term namespace was coined.

But, and this is the main thing:

The call for Delphi compatibility is MUCH larger than the call for ISO
or Extended ISO pascal.

If someone were to submit patches to improve the ISO-Pascal compatibility:
no problem, they would be accepted. Once upon a time, we had a gpc mode
(which is pretty much what ISO pascal is), but there is no demand for it,
so it died a quiet death.

Theorizing is nice, but sterile if no-one uses it in practice.

And in view of the large Delphi codebase: I think Borland didn't do such
a bad job of it.

Personally, I fail to understand what people are complaining about. 
I make my programs with the tools available, and they work damn well.

Michael.