Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
> On 6/19/06, Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I was astonished
>> to discover that FPC was actually an objective Pascal, and that the
>> Lazarus layer was just addding IDE and LCL.
>
> Probably you should read the history of Object Pascal:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_Pascal
>
> It exists since 1985 now. Pure Pascal is has very limited use today.
> When people say Pascal, they acctually mean "Object Pascal".
That's a mater of opinion. Who is "they"? If you are talking about
programmers who already use the language, then sure, but that's
immaterial, if you want to expand the usage of the language then you
need to think about the uninformed target. IMO there are a lot of
seasoned programmers out there whose main exposure to pascal may have
been to turbo pascal in their younger years, and to a guy like that when
you mention pascal you may very well be talking about the pascal of old.
There is nothing in the name to indicate that the pascal you talk about
is actually object pascal. That is a problem with the perception of the
language, and I think it is agreed that pascal has a perception problem.
If you do not agree with what guys like Giuliano Colla have to say then
I'm afraid you got your blinders on.
>
>> Keeping a name almost 40 years old makes you think that it's a 40 years
>> old thing.
>
> People still using c don´t seam to mind about this.
Then again c isn't an object oriented language. I think you miss the
whole point, that's why we have the c++ name to reflect the OO additions.
>
>> Let's call it Object-Pascal, O-Pascal, Pascal++, PascalPlus, whatever
>> you want, and the chances that someone will stop and give a look will
>> increase thousandfold.
>
> Lol! You just reinvented the name of the language with the first attempt.
>
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
