Leonardo M. Ram? <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- On Fri, 12/5/08, Guillermo Martínez Jiménez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
By the way, Linux is good as it is now and Pascal isn't the best
option to create an operating system.
Are you sure? doesn't older MacOS's versions where written in Object Pascal?
Yes, and there's nothing wrong with Pascal for an OS. It would be excellent.
I think the problem here (again) is not the language, it's the critical mass of
users of the language. Using C for Linux was a good bet, not because the
language is good (Pascal is way better for me), but because C has a wider user
base who can fix/add features.
Using C for Linux was the only way, because there was a free C compiler
(GCC) and none for Pascal or other comparable languages. Things have
changed since then, but much of the software industry is on a path
decided from the situation 20 years ago. The industry took the C route
since there was no cross-platform Pascal, while Linux made the choice
from available free software. Now everything must have inherited design
flaws from C just because of what was available in the 80's. That is,
unless the tide changes. It can happen.
"Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My open source project, for example, the Virtual Magnifying Glass,
suffers in linux because KDE only wishes to distribute C++/Qt software
and Gnome only distributes C and C# software, so it get's hard to be
popular.
Now, that sounds like one real problem, related to the porting issue,
which we can address. And not that doesn't need as much work.
So the KDE and Gnome projects are language-locked? (How? Surely users
don't select software by language? Or are the distros incomplete,
FPC-wise? Hard to recompile?) Anyway. that sounds bad! And that suggests
a much shorter path: Adapt a distribution to "Pascal Gnome" support,
with full Pascal interfaces and code, or whatever is missing. Port Gnome
examples, if it isn't already done, and show that Pascal (FPC) is not
only an option but a *better* solution. Easier than C/C++, faster than
Java, much faster than Python... I don't know if an FPC-tuned distro
would make any difference, stronger FPC support in, say, Ubuntu, would
make a bigger impact. Acceptance of FPC sounds like a good goal to me.
Who isn't distributing? Gnome? That isn't a distribution. I don't quite
understand what you mean.
The "FPC OS" doesn't have to be 100% written in FPC, not even 10%. No
hurry. The C code is ugly but it works as long as you don't take GCC
out. Port what really counts, making it possible and well supported to
write *new* programs in FPC.
/Ingemar
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
