Am 29.12.2013 00:25 schrieb "Marcos Douglas" <m...@delfire.net>: > > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Sven Barth <pascaldra...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > On 28.12.2013 14:25, Marcos Douglas wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Florian Klämpfl > >> <flor...@freepascal.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> Am 28.12.2013 13:37, schrieb Jürgen Hestermann: > >>>> > >>>> Am 2013-12-28 13:19, schrieb Florian Klämpfl: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I understand. But if the major companies prefer to use C# or Java > >>>>>> instead Delphi well, they not care about Delphi compatibilities. If > >>>>>> they care, why they would be leaving Delphi? > >>>>> > >>>>> If they leave Delphi compatibility, they normally don't go for a > >>>>> marginal oss compiler. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> The question is: > >>>> Why did they use Delphi before at all? > >>>> > >>>> If the reason was that Delphi was a very common and widespread > >>>> programming environment > >>>> then it is a understandable behaviour to move to the next main stream > >>>> environment > >>>> as soon as budget and time allows. > >>>> Such people would never care about FPC/Lazarus (even when it was fully > >>>> Delphi "compatible"). > >>>> They would never think about using it. > >>>> So making FPC/Lazarus "compatible" would not hold any user of this > >>>> group. > >>> > >>> > >>> 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. Everything else is "by-catch". > >>> > >>>> > >>>> If the reason was that they like Pascal as an easy to learn and > >>>> mantain language then they will invest into migration even > >>>> if not all parts are the identical to Delphi. > >>>> Just the opposite: > >>>> They may like that not all misconcepts are repeated in > >>>> FPC/Lazarus and they may like that it is open source. > >>> > >>> > >>> 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) Unfortuntaly GPC development stopped for > >>> years due to missing contributors. The people keeping FPC alive are > >>> those interested in Delphi compatibility. > >> > >> > >> Right. > >> I didn't understand one thing: If I'm a Delphi XE2 programmer > >> (suppose), why I will need to keep FPC compatible with Delphi? If I'm > >> a Delphi programmer I will use... Delphi. > > > > > > Because you (the XE2 programmer) might look at Delphi XE5's NewGen compiler > > (the LLVM based one) and think: "What the f*** are they doing with the > > language?! O.o" > > Or you might want to be compatible to more platforms than provided by Delphi > > XE2 or you might want to keep using a VCL compatible GUI library on other > > platforms whereby in Delphi you need to use FireMonkey here. > > Ok, understood and just for clarify I'm not a XE2 programmer... I said > "suppose".
Of course. I've just gone with your example where you supposed that you're one ;) Regards, Sven
-- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus