[fpc-pascal] Does FPC 2.8.0 can actually still be called Pascal ?

Andrew Brunner atbrunner at aurawin.com
Thu Feb 28 15:57:41 CET 2013

On 02/28/2013 03:25 AM, Marco van de Voort wrote:
> So "Sulphur" then? It is the next element in the same group of the periodic
> table and twice as heavy as Oxygen? Moreover hints at being a bit evil and
> vile.

Won't work.  The truth is:
  1.) most don't kown/know their current state.
  2.) those that do, are rightly wanting to align properly.
  3.) loss of naturally good talent (it only takes one bad idea to misguide)
  4.) draw of skilled talent that binds contention.
  5.) there is a measurable force that supports M$'s (project of the 
day).  The force involves collective conscientiousness.  And control 
over perception.  The social fabric is presently being shaped in their 
favor.  From our perspective, no-one ever lost their teeth buying 
Microsoft's Windows.  But from their perspective, no-one ever lost their 
job buying a M$ project.  Both perceptions are negative towards the 
truth. Proof to me that they have successfully adopted a viable strategy.
  6.) Collective conscientiousness demonstrates that Pascal is a dead 
language.  So either we overcome the notion that the language is dead 
(my favourite) or perhaps call it something else and try to ignite a 
spark and see what happens.

> The idea behind hinting on that last bit is if we simply admit we are dirty, we won't
> have any useless cleanness discussions anymore?

With strong acting/performance project, cleanliness is just inherent.  
So I would say sure.
With such a project, bad code would be limited to reflect on the code 
But to 1.) above, wrongly kowning up to bad code contributions is my 
largest genuine concern.

Andrew Brunner

Aurawin LLC
15843 Garrison Circle
Austin, TX 78717


Aurawin is a great new way to store, share, and explore all your content
featuring our innovative cloud social computing platform.

More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list