[fpc-pascal] What to do to get new users

[Ralf Quint]

Sorry, but there has been so much nonsense in this thread, I just had to 
add my 2c as well.
On 10/15/2024 4:07 PM, Rainer Stratmann via fpc-pascal wrote:
> At the Lazarus Congress in Cologne in October 2024, it ended up being very
> interesting. An important question came up.
>
> Why are no new users coming to Lazarus/Freepascal?
> Why do we find it so difficult?
> How can we get new, younger users to come to us?
>
> The same questions came up over a year ago at a Freepascal/Lazarus meeting in
> Backnang.
>
> I have some answers:
>
> - The official Freepascal website doesn't look like the project is very lively.
An absolute non-factor. Yes, the "Latest News" seems to be dated, but 
then I would prefer people involved in the project work on compiler 
related issues rather than on web sites.
The latest FPC announcement is now 3 years ago, but then the overall 
release cycle is much slower than on a lot of other projects, but by and 
large, I could consider this a good thing....
> - Lazarus looks very complicated with its many windows. And it is also
> relatively complicated to understand and use. There are too many options that
> are too nested.
Well, what is so complicated about it? Of course, you need to know what 
you are doing. Maybe some windows could be hidden until they might be 
used (like Watches, Evaluate/modify, or debugger), and they are easily 
activated from the Window menu. But if you are really programming, it 
actually make sense.
Is Lazarus "perfect"? Probably not, but IMHO, it is light years better 
and easier to use like abominations like Visual Studio (Code, yes, I 
know they are not the same) or any of that Eclipse based stuff. And 
definitely FAR more lightweight than any of those.
>
> - Crosscompiling: The compiler file name is hidden in Tools - Settings instead
> of in the project settings. I found this out after some time. Since it was
> nowhere to be found in the project settings I first thought it might be hard-
> coded!
That doesn't make any sense!  Yeah, cross-compiling could be made it bit 
more obvious, but then in a lot of the "alternatives", you can't 
cross-compile at all. And then, if you properly design your software, 
this isn't a task that you do a couple of dozen times and hour...
> - Linux: All relevant files (executable files, configuration files, source code,
> etc.) are scattered all over the Linux system. This is very complicated again.
> If Lazarus/Freepascal were a Linux system program it would make sense. But it
> is NOT a Linux system program. The chance that it will be used by several
> users on a multi-user system is close to zero.
non-issue IMHP
>
> - Fpcupdeluxe: A good idea. But it doesn't work. I have tried to install an
> AVR crosscompiler on a Linux system. Fatal: Can't find unit Infodrwf used by
> Project1. And ‘Project1’ does not use any unit at all.
don't care, never used it in all the years that I am using FPC (going 
back when it was still called FPK) and Lazarus.
>
> - For a new installation of Lazarus: The most important quick start icons have
> to be configured again at the bottom of the source code window. So that fast
> and smooth work is possible. Instead of placing them like this from the start.
> The many confusing windows I have already mentioned above.
You completely lost me on this one.... 😕
> As good as Freepascal is. The situation described above is a brake pad and
> sooner or later leads to a dead end.
Maybe you need to look at your overall approach to (application) 
programming, not as FPC/Lazarus being another Python (or whatever is the 
rad programming language de jour)
> My tip is to put all the required files in one directory. This also makes it
> easier to install an installation on the different systems. Only one ZIP file is
> then required. And you can even install it without internet access.

I don't see the general problem here. By and large, FPC (and Lazarus) is 
installed rather quickly. What I however miss is an option to transfer a 
(general) configuration from one system to another, specially between 
different OS, as I do most of my work on Windows 1[0,1] but some of my 
application also need to be tested and worked on on Linux or macOS. This 
cross-platform capability is IMHO one of the reasons why you couldn't 
just "put everything into one directory". The directory structure, 
including permissions, is simply different for each of them.

If I would have some serious complains, it would be that in the last few 
years at least some of the developers have paid too much attention to 
include all those (supposedly) fancy new paradigms instead of the core 
of programming in Pascal. Even Object Pascal, though IMHO not every 
little thing needs to be put into objects/classes when there really 
isn't any gain from it. Some times, commonly used functions might be 
clearer and thus easier to understand and maintain written in procedural 
form.

As far as Lazarus is concerned, the only thing that just keeps bugging 
me is that there is no ability to "just compile" a file that is 
currently active in the editor, to test it for syntactical 
correctness/typos, without having to create a separate test project each 
and every time or recompiling it in the context of a larger application. 
This could be one thing that could make it easier for newbies to Pascal 
to get started, specially when at first dealing with non-GUI programs.

>    
> Translated withwww.deepl.com
Ist Dein Problem möglicherweise dass Deine Englischkenntinisse nicht die 
Besten sind und Du deshalb einige der Strukturen nicht verstehst?



Ralf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freepascal.org/pipermail/fpc-pascal/attachments/20241016/c4cce221/attachment-0001.htm>