Am 28.12.2013 16:40, schrieb Jürgen Hestermann: > Am 2013-12-28 14:09, schrieb Florian Klämpfl: >> The world is not only 1 and 0. FPC lives (and living means getting >> usefull code!) from being delphi compatible but filling the niches >> delphi leaves open. > > What niches?
If you can/want affort it; if it supports the target you need etc. ... niches ... > It seems you want a possibly exact clone so where are niches? Between clone and good compatibility is a *slight* difference. > And what is the reason behind this? The niches. > Just use Delphi then. On linux? VCL/IDE on Mac OS X? > >> GPC proved your argumentation wrong. GPC took the "clean way" of >> extended pascal (you always complain about fpc's dyn. arrays. Just use >> GPC, it has the clean solution) > > I don't know GPC so I can't comment on this. > But I never complained about dynamic arrays (I use them as often as > possible) > I complained about their syntax (automatic dereferencing on indexing). Have a look at extended pascal then. > > >> Unfortuntaly GPC development stopped for >> years due to missing contributors. > > And the reason is that is was not enough Delphi compatible? What else? The main difference between GPC and FPC is/was that GPC aimed at iso/extended pascal while FPC had a delphi mode. > > >> The people keeping FPC alive are >> those interested in Delphi compatibility. > > That seems to be the bottom line which makes any discussion useless. Yes. > Don't write any opinions anymore they will be ignored anyway. Yes. > All those who don't like the current developement should role their own. There is a slight but important different: discussions are useless, writing specifications and code not. > Let's split Pascal into hundreds of dialects instead of striving for an > universal one. Well, at least some people try to prevent this by taking delphi as the universal one. -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
