[fpc-pascal] Bls: Bug in FPC 3.0.0 (was: Bug in FPC 3.0.0?)

Serguei TARASSOV serge at arbinada.com
Sun Mar 6 12:02:38 CET 2016

Michael Van Canneyt wrote
>> The Delphi way is less poor but both are risky.
> Oh, why is that ?

I.e. because of third-party frameworks.
When programmer stays with FPC and its libraries only, the support and the
compatibility are not a big problem (but some libraries become abandoned or
some bugs stay in state "fix it yourself"). For "real world programs" many
third-party frameworks are used and even the source code doesn't solve the
problem. The case with UniDAC is in the start of this topic but we have
about 20 other third-party libraries in our codebase. Any responsible
engineer should minimize such technical risks.
So the Delphi way is a less risky IMO.

>> The absence of standards is the most weak point of Object Pascal/Delphi
>> and
>> its "standard" libraries.
> We could not be more in agreement.
> However, I wish to point out that FPC here is always in the disadvantage:
> Borland/Inprise/Embarcadero/Idera has consistently denied to cooperate on
> this. 
> (whether or not this is a company policy, or because they simply ignore
> us, I do not know).
> When FPC implemented a language feature first, they later implemented it
> differently.
> To give an example:
> When Jonas designed the objective C classes for Mac OS X, he explicitly
> mailed them to ask
> what they were going to do. He got a noncommittal answer.
> By contrast, when we implement a feature that Delphi has, we always
> implement it in a 
> compatible way in $MODE Delphi. 
> When doing base classes, we make sure that we provide all identifiers that
> Delphi 
> provides, so your code compiles.
> If someone reports a missing identifier, we always attempt to implement
> it.
> I don't see what we can do more ?

I don't blame someone at all.
My point is only the regret about the absent of standards on the language
and common libraries like in C/C++.
When there is no standards in law "de jure", the most popular implementation
becomes the "standard" in fact. I suppose, that Delphi is the standard in
fact the last 15 years because of the large community and the large
developers base (1M at least).

The same reason we use English in mailing lists but not French or Russian
regardless the wide Russian Delphi community.

So in my taste the {$MODE DELPHI} should have been support not only language
features but all common libraries too, at least RTL/DB. All FPC
extension/modifications could be added in FPC mode. Not easy but reliable.

View this message in context: http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Bug-in-FPC-3-0-0-was-Bug-in-FPC-3-0-0-tp5724274p5724460.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list