> I'm interested in starting (or joining) a discussion on the next (*non*
> backwards compatible) version of FPC.
Did you take a look at Oxygen (RemObjects Elements) ?
-Michael
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
That's an interesting project there.
One thing that does spring to mind though.,, what features of Delphi and
FPC made the language unsuitable for Martin Schreiber, and is it anything
we developers can possibly address in some way?
Gareth aka. Kit
On Fri 15/02/19 20:32 , Jonas Maebe
On 15/02/19 06:28, James via fpc-devel wrote:
I'm interested in starting (or joining) a discussion on the next (*non*
backwards compatible) version of FPC.
As mentioned by others, that's not really something any of the current
FPC developers are interested in working on. Martin Schreiber,
El 15/2/19 a les 12:27, J. Gareth Moreton ha escrit:
I dare say, I would consider elevating this, especially as it's a
feature being used by an end user and is pretty serious if a
multi-threaded program can sometimes freeze due to a race hazard.
The problem is, as I said before, I cannot
I dare say, I would consider elevating this, especially as it's a feature
being used by an end user and is pretty serious if a multi-threaded program
can sometimes freeze due to a race hazard.
Unfortunately, I don't use threads enough to know for sure how the
underlying classes work, otherwise
I can't speak for the senior developers, but I think there's a preference
that backwards compatibility is maintained, at least between versions of
FPC if not Delphi. At least my preference is to attempt to better support
the existing FPC - for example, I tend to do a lot of work and research
Am Fr., 15. Feb. 2019, 10:07 hat James via fpc-devel <
fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org> geschrieben:
> I'm interested in starting (or joining) a discussion on the next (*non*
> backwards compatible) version of FPC. Instead of being classically object
> oriented, there is merit in examining a model
