[fpc-pascal] Bls: Bls: Bls: Quick Modern Object Pascal Introduction, for Programmers

Mr Bee pak.lebah at yahoo.com
Tue Jun 21 14:03:34 CEST 2016

Adding to Michalis Kamburelis argument… 
Keeping backwards compatibility [BC] is great. However, thinking about forwards compatibility [FC] is also necessary. Keeping BC too tight will also hold back our forward thinking. We will be stucked in the past forever. No matter how hard we keep the BC, we eventually will break it anyway. If we want FPC to be known as modern programming language, just let go off the past. Unless, we are happy to be still associated with the old 70's Pascal.
So, we must plan the appropriate timing when we should break BC and let FC taking over. I think FPC v.3.2 would be appropriate enough. Besides, what's the release notes for? right? :) 
–Mr Bee

    Pada Selasa, 21 Juni 2016 16:30, Sven Barth <pascaldragon at googlemail.com> menulis:

 Am 21.06.2016 08:58 schrieb "Mr Bee" <pak.lebah at yahoo.com>:
> > Maybe a little bit offtopic, but I have a question regarding the compiler directives: is there a way to tell Lazarus to use these directives in every new unit?
> I even expect a bit further. These {$MODE OBJFPC}, {$H+}, and {$J-} directives should be the *default* directives for every new FPC programs/units. We're now using Free Pascal compiler on 2016. Why do we need to explicitly declare Free Pascal mode in a Free Pascal program? In 21st century, our string should not be limited to 255 chars anymore. And what the hell is "writable constant"? It's contradictio in terminis. :)We have a strong focus on backwards compatibility, so the default mode stays "fpc" and changing a modes' default settings would also affect backwards compatibility.Regards,
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal at lists.freepascal.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freepascal.org/pipermail/fpc-pascal/attachments/20160621/4b67e8d3/attachment.html>

More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list