What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
25 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

vfclists .
What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Is it Free Pascal?

--
Frank Church

=======================
http://devblog.brahmancreations.com

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

vfclists .


On 27 February 2012 10:15, Frank Church <[hidden email]> wrote:
What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Is it Free Pascal?

--
Frank Church


What license are FPC and Lazarus, are they GPL?

I think somehow a way must be found of getting Pascal identified with Free Pascal on the Linux platform if it is the most widely used. How about Lazarus Pascal. The problem with Free Pascal, actually most of the older languages is that there tend to be many variations and some what different dialects. There is more or less only one Ruby, one Python, one PHP, one Scala, you know whatever. There are a few variants of Ruby but so long as they can all run Ruby on Rails who cares?

This how I see things.

1. Establish Free Pascal as THE Pascal, THE Object (based) Pascal on Linux

2. A way must be found of uncoupling the Free Pascal, the LCL, the FCL and the Lazarus IDE.

3. The Lazarus IDE (which should be the killer app) must be clearly distinguished. a) as Pascal IDE , ie dealing purely with Pascal Source code, b) an IDE that integrates well with the Non Visual aspects of the LCL e.g. fcl-web for instance c) a graphic based IDE akin to Delphi

4. Both WIKIs are need a makeover. I am sure this has been discussed before :), but the image is really important. Far lesser projects somehow project a more 'professional' image just because of their websites. Lazarus wiki is like the Foyles bookshop of the past if not the present,or like some kind of army surplus store. You can find nearly everything you want, probably everything but it is not as organized and as slick as the competition. A lot of the websites of other projects hardly contain anything, but they all look modern and up to date.

5. This requires an increase in the uptake of Pascal. I mean if a language like D can get so much attention and have libraries being created for it why can't Pascal which has been longer established.

6.  I guess one major shortcoming of Pascal is it is not immediately identified with objects, like C. Can Free Pascal simply change its name to Object Pascal
Honestly I think the name is probably the biggest problem if in an era of objects everything it is not associated with Pascal due to its age and past.

In short how does Pascal get itself restablished?
 
=======================
http://devblog.brahmancreations.com



--
Frank Church

=======================
http://devblog.brahmancreations.com

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

shiruba2012
In reply to this post by vfclists .
Hi Frank,

On 2012/02/27, at 19:15, Frank Church <[hidden email]> wrote:

What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Is it Free Pascal?

Well I don't have any data to back this up, but I would certainly say FPC.

There is gnu pascal, but it fails to compile even trivial turbo pascal style programs, and is really just a front end to gcc.

There was Kylix, but it was abandoned, and long ago overtaken by FPC feature-wise.

Delphi has recently shown renewed interest in cross-platform support, but the IDE itself only runs on Windows, so far as I am aware.

In the Mac os area, FPC also supports legacy Mac pascal dialects, as well as having native objective support, so it provides a good migration path.  FPC can be used for Mac os native and/or cross-platform apps.

I used to help out with virtual pascal, which also had experimental support, but it is very x86 specific, and has fallen behind in feature support, due to difficulty in modifying the asm blob that is the compiler support.

Sibyl (sp?) is quite os/2 centric.

I would say that FPC is the only real competitor to Delphi right now, and it works on Windows, Linux, BSD, and mac os.  In fact, FPC even has an experimental java byte-code target now.  

Thank you,
    Noah silva


--
Frank Church

=======================
http://devblog.brahmancreations.com
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

shiruba2012
In reply to this post by vfclists .
Hi,

On 2012/02/27, at 23:14, Frank Church <[hidden email]> wrote:



On 27 February 2012 10:15, Frank Church <[hidden email]> wrote:
What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Is it Free Pascal?

--
Frank Church


What license are FPC and Lazarus, are they GPL?


The compilers themselves are gpl.  The libraries are modified lgpl so that they can be used for commercial projects.

I think somehow a way must be found of getting Pascal identified with Free Pascal on the Linux platform if it is the most widely used.

I think that is probably already the case, though others may feel free to chime if they disagree. 

How about Lazarus Pascal. The problem with Free Pascal, actually most of the older languages is that there tend to be many variations and some what different dialects. There is more or less only one Ruby, one Python, one PHP, one Scala, you know whatever. There are a few variants of Ruby but so long as they can all run Ruby on Rails who cares?

This how I see things.

1. Establish Free Pascal as THE Pascal, THE Object (based) Pascal on Linux

Again, I thing it is already the most realistic development option on Linux.

2. A way must be found of uncoupling the Free Pascal, the LCL, the FCL and the Lazarus IDE.

They are mostly separate projects, so far as I have seen.  LCL is part of Lazarus, FCL is part of FPC.  Some things that are in LCL should arguably be part of FCL, but certainly FCL is usable without Lazarus.

3. The Lazarus IDE (which should be the killer app) must be clearly distinguished. a) as Pascal IDE , ie dealing purely with Pascal Source code,

Which it pretty much is.

b) an IDE that integrates well with the Non Visual aspects of the LCL e.g. fcl-web for instance

This part I don't know a lot about, however my impression is that it may be a bit weak here.

c) a graphic based IDE akin to Delphi

This is already the case.  Lazarus is relatively mature for both widows and Linux.  Mac os also more or less works.


4. Both WIKIs are need a makeover. I am sure this has been discussed before :), but the image is really important. Far lesser projects somehow project a more 'professional' image just because of their websites. Lazarus wiki is like the Foyles bookshop of the past if not the present,or like some kind of army surplus store. You can find nearly everything you want, probably everything but it is not as organized and as slick as the competition. A lot of the websites of other projects hardly contain anything, but they all look modern and up to date.


I agree somewhat here, but I am sure this is a problem of volunteers.  

5. This requires an increase in the uptake of Pascal. I mean if a language like D can get so much attention and have libraries being created for it why can't Pascal which has been longer established.

Perhaps people see D as a new thing?  Yet there are a lot of libraries around - its just that as you said, it takes a bit of searching.


6.  I guess one major shortcoming of Pascal is it is not immediately identified with objects, like C. Can Free Pascal simply change its name to Object Pascal

Object pascal is a language syntax, not a product.

Honestly I think the name is probably the biggest problem if in an era of objects everything it is not associated with Pascal due to its age and past.

In short how does Pascal get itself restablished?

This may be difficult in an era where all the rage is "managed" languages.

-- Noah silva
 
=======================
http://devblog.brahmancreations.com



--
Frank Church

=======================
http://devblog.brahmancreations.com
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Sven Barth-2
In reply to this post by shiruba2012
Am 27.02.2012 16:24, schrieb Noa Shiruba:
> I would say that FPC is the only real competitor to Delphi right now,
> and it works on Windows, Linux, BSD, and mac os. In fact, FPC even has
> an experimental java byte-code target now.

Let's not forget minor targets like GameBoy Advance, Nintendo DS, Wii,
DOS, OS/2, embedded ARM (and in theory also other processors) and the
native NT API (the API between the NT kernel and the Win32 subsystem
which also must be used for driver development).

Regards,
Sven
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Rich Saunders
In reply to this post by shiruba2012
On 2/27/12 10:33 AM, Noa Shiruba wrote:
On 2012/02/27, at 23:14, Frank Church <[hidden email]> wrote:I think somehow a way must be found of getting Pascal identified with Free Pascal on the Linux platform if it is the most widely used.

I think that is probably already the case, though others may feel free to chime if they disagree.
Unfortunately, as soon as you mention "Pascal" many, many developers, especially in the USA, turn up their noses and run for the hills, so identifying FPC with "Pascal" would NOT help in growing the adoption of FPC.

Ages ago Pascal acquired the reputation of being a incomplete language suitable only for teaching. Primarily that was due to the primitive I/O and lack of practical runtime support of the earliest versions. Once this happened that reputation has been almost impossible to overcome in the wider arena of software development. Those of us who have stuck with it have enjoyed the advantages it provides, but the idea of making it cool again with the development gurus in most shops is a lost cause. They have passed it over and simply will not look back.


_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Graeme Geldenhuys-2
In reply to this post by Sven Barth-2
On 27 February 2012 17:58, Sven Barth  wrote:

> Am 27.02.2012 16:24, schrieb Noa Shiruba:
>
>> I would say that FPC is the only real competitor to Delphi right now,
>> and it works on Windows, Linux, BSD, and mac os. In fact, FPC even has
>> an experimental java byte-code target now.
>
>
> Let's not forget minor targets like GameBoy Advance, Nintendo DS, Wii, DOS,
> OS/2, embedded ARM (and in theory also other processors) and the native NT
> API (the API between the NT kernel and the Win32 subsystem which also must
> be used for driver development).


...and Solaris (I tested it on OpenSolaris), and Haiku.  :)



--
Regards,
  - Graeme -


_______________________________________________
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://fpgui.sourceforge.net
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Graeme Geldenhuys-2
In reply to this post by Rich Saunders
On 27 February 2012 18:42, Rich Saunders  wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, as soon as you mention "Pascal" many, many developers,
> especially in the USA, turn up their noses and run for the hills,


I think that problem is more widespread that just the USA. I have seen
it often in the UK and RSA too. I also believe that is exactly the
reason why Borland changed the name of the language from Object Pascal
to Delphi.


Lets see, what new names can we use.... C became C++, then we got C#,
then we got D.

Umm.. Pascal -> Object Pascal -> Q   :-)    ( the next letter in the alphabet)

So should we just go for P++    (I believe Florian used this idea long long ago)



--
Regards,
  - Graeme -


_______________________________________________
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://fpgui.sourceforge.net
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

noreply
In reply to this post by vfclists .
Frank Church wrote:
> 5. This requires an increase in the uptake of Pascal. I mean if a language
> like D can get so much attention and have libraries being created for it
> why can't Pascal which has been longer established.
>

Another language to check out is TutorialD by Date and Darwen, a pascal
like relational database language. Another interesting one which there is
almost no information about is "Pascal/R" which was a relational pascal
that died quickly, but I don't know why.


> 6.  I guess one major shortcoming of Pascal is it is not immediately
> identified with objects, like C. Can Free Pascal simply change its name to
> Object Pascal

Not all of freepascal is object oriented, a lot of it is simple procedural
and you have the option to use objects if you want. Java and Ruby make the
grand mistake of making everything an object and forcing you to code in
objects when you shouldn't have to. C# the ugly java rip off language also
forces you into objects and classes.  If IntToStr was welded in to some
object and I had to create an "IntToStr object" before calling IntToStr,
that would suck major.

What would be nice is some actual innovation in programming languages
instead of reinventing C++ over and over again.  I think what languages
need is a relational twist to them. A new data type known as the Table in
our langauges instead of arrays and records. It is known as a Relvar in
TutorialD. We use ugly "object relational (o/r) mappers" instead of having
tables and relvars in our language. Too many people reinvent the database
using arrays, associative arrays, stringlists, TLists - all this should be
a database table that you can create easily in your language instead of
resorting to embedding SQL strings into your program.

> Honestly I think the name is probably the biggest problem if in an era of
> objects everything it is not associated with Pascal due to its age and
> past.
>

Objects everything.. yuck.. I still like simple procedural code for
teaching people and for doing quick prototypes, I think one of the biggest
mistakes of the industry is obsession with objects and not enough
education about relational techniques (http://www.dbdebunk.com)
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

shiruba2012
Hi,

2012/2/28 Lars <[hidden email]>
Frank Church wrote:
> 5. This requires an increase in the uptake of Pascal. I mean if a language
> like D can get so much attention and have libraries being created for it
> why can't Pascal which has been longer established.
>

Another language to check out is TutorialD by Date and Darwen, a pascal
like relational database language. Another interesting one which there is
almost no information about is "Pascal/R" which was a relational pascal
that died quickly, but I don't know why.

Certainly there are a lot of interesting languages.  I also find Oberon and Modula fascinating - the problem is that when you get into "research languages", actually getting them to interact with the rest of the system gets to be a burden.  For example, FPC now has ObjectiveC compatibility on Mac OS X, and FPC/Delphi can use C headers with trivial translations on all systems.  Making obscure API calls can be nearly impossible in some languages, or involve a large amount of work - the situation with having to translate header files is bad enough.  Add to that the availability (or lack of) native libraries to do routine tasks - This is something that languages like C and Java excel at, and basically doesn't exist for more research-oriented languages.  FPC is somewhere in the middle.

> 6.  I guess one major shortcoming of Pascal is it is not immediately
> identified with objects, like C. Can Free Pascal simply change its name to
> Object Pascal

Not all of freepascal is object oriented, a lot of it is simple procedural
and you have the option to use objects if you want. Java and Ruby make the
grand mistake of making everything an object and forcing you to code in
objects when you shouldn't have to.

I agree here.  The idea that objects are automatically better for *everything* is a bit much.  If an object is a noun, a procedure is a verb.  Objects are useful when you need to encapsulate and track state, and are extremely useful in some areas (i.e. GUI operations, tracking handles, etc.), but of little value in certain other areas.  
 
C# the ugly java rip off language also
forces you into objects and classes.  

To be share, C# is better than Java in some ways, despite being a rip-off.  It has the advantage of hindsight, so they could do some things differently than Java and Delphi.  (We the main designer of C#, right?)
 
If IntToStr was welded in to some
object and I had to create an "IntToStr object" before calling IntToStr,
that would suck major.

Agreed.  I would assume that should be a class method, at least.  The way it works in Java, iirc, is that the "toStr" method would be a method of the Integer class.  Obviously, making even the lowest level types into Objects will exact a performance penalty.
 
What would be nice is some actual innovation in programming languages
instead of reinventing C++ over and over again.  I think what languages... ....
a database table that you can create easily in your language instead of
resorting to embedding SQL strings into your program.

I am an ABAP programmer by day, and I have to say that although I find ABAP primitive in some respects (f.e., no WITH ... DO functionality, annoying spacing rules, etc.), the data type, library, and most notably, database functionality is a dream.  It's too bad that the language is heavily tied to SAP.  In ABAP, you can declare variables to be of the type of certain table fields, and the compiler will automatically match that.  You can declare new types in the data dictionary, and then use them in your programs.  In addition, you can use SQL as part of the language itself, rather than as a string literal - which means tables, etc., can be checked at compile time.  I could go on, but the point is that although the language is lacking some bullet-point type features that all the cool kids have, it is very practical for developing business applications in.  On the down side, you basically can't use ABAP without a huge database and BASIS runtime installation - it wouldn't be good for desktop apps unless you have gigabytes to devote.

I have tinkered with adding some of this basic functionality to FPC in the past, but it would require significant compiler changes.  I do have an ABAP utility language for FPC though which handles a lot of ABAP functions in FPC (translate(), etc.) to make porting easier, as I often prototype in FPC offline and then convert to ABAP.

As for using database tables, I think FPC could stand to have more included data types for handing such things without a database.  We have dynamic arrays, which can't even handle a deletion of an item in the middle, and then we have StringList.  As soon as people want something like DualStringList, they resort to using the Object field of StringList and all kinds of Typecasting hacks.  Generics solves this problem to a degree, but is still a relatively new feature, and perhaps not the solution for everything.

> Honestly I think the name is probably the biggest problem if in an era of
> objects everything it is not associated with Pascal due to its age and
> past.

Well ObjectPascal has been around since the early 90s at least, and from an end-user point of view, pascal became primarily Object Oriented with TurboVision and later Delphi in the mid 90s - so anyone who doesn't know about that is severely misinformed.  I am not sure that changing the name will make up for that.   

FPC still keeps compatibility with real mode and non-OOP programming - and there is no way to change that any time soon even if we wanted to, so I am not sure what you are suggesting.  For example, most of the system/sysutils units is not OOPs.  In order to make things work, we have to call OS level features and kernel ABIs, which are almost never OOP.  (Except on Mac OS for some things).  

I think that if we suddenly had a huge budget in terms of money or developer time, there would be other areas we would be better off investing in - like making threads easier and more reliable to use.  I have to admit to being jealous when I see stuff like this in other languages:

Run_in_background (save_file(), update_gui());

Probably before that, I would push for proper UTF8String support, so that functions like Copy() return the correct characters instead of still thinking in byte mode.

In the end, everyone here I expect loves Pascal, or we wouldn't be on this list, but expecting it to suddenly become super popular tomorrow is probably not realistic - on the other hand, think of it as your secret weapon.  While everyone else is struggling with doing simple string operations and pointer issues in C++, include file issues in C, OCX registration issues in classic VB, the common runtime version mismatch issues in Java, and the 12 versions of .NET that seem to have to be present on any system in order for .NET programs to function - you can have a single set of source code that compiled to Windows, Linux, and Mac OS - even in GUI programs.  You can also have the low level power of C when you need it, and the ease of higher level programming languages and OOP when it's useful.  

With newer versions of Delphi and FPC, they have both been catching up in terms of compiler level features:  Anonymous methods, generics, safer object references, helper classes, etc.  The only thing that doesn't really fit neatly into the ObjectPascal model is garbage collection, and that's largely a non-issue with things like Try..Finally and TComponent. (Delphi.NET I suppose merges OP with garbage collection somehow or another).

If you want to convince people to use FPC and are having issues, you should ask them what features, exactly, they are looking for.  Chances are that FPC has them.  (If they want a functional language, though, then you're out of luck).

Objects everything.. yuck.. I still like simple procedural code for
teaching people and for doing quick prototypes, I think one of the biggest
mistakes of the industry is obsession with objects and not enough
education about relational techniques (http://www.dbdebunk.com)

Procedural models, OOP models, and relational models all serve different needs.  Certainly it would be convenient if FPC had native DB integration. (i.e. compiler level instead of library level).

Thank you,
    Noah Silva
 

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Sven Barth-2
Am 28.02.2012 08:22, schrieb Noah Silva:
> Well ObjectPascal has been around since the early 90s at least, and from
> an end-user point of view, pascal became primarily Object Oriented with
> TurboVision and later Delphi in the mid 90s - so anyone who doesn't know
> about that is severely misinformed.  I am not sure that changing the
> name will make up for that.
>

To stress this a bit: around two weeks ago I told my "program
optimization" teacher (who's the head of the "programing languages"
chair) about Free Pascal (and Delphi) and he didn't know that Pascal
"already" supports OOP... :(

Regards,
Sven
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

shiruba2012
Sven,

Wow, you should buy him a book on Delphi.  I would say on FPC, but the main FPC book is only to be had by mail order - I keep hoping they will offer it in Kindle format or such.

  -- Noah

On 2012/02/28, at 18:05, Sven Barth <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Am 28.02.2012 08:22, schrieb Noah Silva:
>> Well ObjectPascal has been around since the early 90s at least, and from
>> an end-user point of view, pascal became primarily Object Oriented with
>> TurboVision and later Delphi in the mid 90s - so anyone who doesn't know
>> about that is severely misinformed.  I am not sure that changing the
>> name will make up for that.
>>
>
> To stress this a bit: around two weeks ago I told my "program optimization" teacher (who's the head of the "programing languages" chair) about Free Pascal (and Delphi) and he didn't know that Pascal "already" supports OOP... :(
>
> Regards,
> Sven
> _______________________________________________
> fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
> http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Graeme Geldenhuys-2
In reply to this post by Sven Barth-2
On 28 February 2012 11:05, Sven Barth wrote:
>
> To stress this a bit: around two weeks ago I told my "program optimization"
> teacher (who's the head of the "programing languages" chair) about Free
> Pascal (and Delphi) and he didn't know that Pascal "already" supports OOP...
> :(

That seems to be the normal response.  There is no hope for us pascal
developers.  :-)



--
Regards,
  - Graeme -


_______________________________________________
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://fpgui.sourceforge.net
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Graeme Geldenhuys-2
In reply to this post by shiruba2012
On 28 February 2012 12:18, Noa Shiruba  wrote:
>
> I would say on FPC, but the main FPC book is only to be had by mail order


Give him a copy of the FPC Language Reference  pdf document.


--
Regards,
  - Graeme -


_______________________________________________
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://fpgui.sourceforge.net
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Marcos Douglas B. Santos
In reply to this post by noreply
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Lars <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Frank Church wrote:
>> 5. This requires an increase in the uptake of Pascal. I mean if a language
>> like D can get so much attention and have libraries being created for it
>> why can't Pascal which has been longer established.
>>
>
> Another language to check out is TutorialD by Date and Darwen, a pascal
> like relational database language. Another interesting one which there is
> almost no information about is "Pascal/R" which was a relational pascal
> that died quickly, but I don't know why.
>
>
>> 6.  I guess one major shortcoming of Pascal is it is not immediately
>> identified with objects, like C. Can Free Pascal simply change its name to
>> Object Pascal
>
> Not all of freepascal is object oriented, a lot of it is simple procedural
> and you have the option to use objects if you want. Java and Ruby make the
> grand mistake of making everything an object and forcing you to code in
> objects when you shouldn't have to. C# the ugly java rip off language also
> forces you into objects and classes.  If IntToStr was welded in to some
> object and I had to create an "IntToStr object" before calling IntToStr,
> that would suck major.
>
> What would be nice is some actual innovation in programming languages
> instead of reinventing C++ over and over again.  I think what languages
> need is a relational twist to them. A new data type known as the Table in
> our langauges instead of arrays and records. It is known as a Relvar in
> TutorialD. We use ugly "object relational (o/r) mappers" instead of having
> tables and relvars in our language. Too many people reinvent the database
> using arrays, associative arrays, stringlists, TLists - all this should be
> a database table that you can create easily in your language instead of
> resorting to embedding SQL strings into your program.

Other language that have the Table type is Lua (www.lua.org).
This is an amazing language, very simple, clean and fast.

>> Honestly I think the name is probably the biggest problem if in an era of
>> objects everything it is not associated with Pascal due to its age and
>> past.
>>
>
> Objects everything.. yuck.. I still like simple procedural code for
> teaching people and for doing quick prototypes, I think one of the biggest
> mistakes of the industry is obsession with objects and not enough
> education about relational techniques (http://www.dbdebunk.com)

+1
I agree with this obsession with objects.

Marcos Douglas
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Lukasz Stafiniak
In reply to this post by shiruba2012
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Noah Silva
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> If you want to convince people to use FPC and are having issues, you should
> ask them what features, exactly, they are looking for.  Chances are that FPC
> has them.  (If they want a functional language, though, then you're out of
> luck).

Pascal is not entirely opposed to being a functional language. There
are two missing language features (consider it a proposal of
Functional Pascal):

(1) A declaration part, that parallels "var", with keyword "val" or
"let" (since "val" is taken up by a procedure). It introduces named
values, i.e. non-assignable variables. The part after "=" can be any
expression. Therefore, this feature spoils the "declaration --
implementation divide" that is dear to Pascal.

(2) Closures. That is, making local functions that only use "const"
arguments and "val / let" variables safe to return from the outer
function. This can be done by allocating the "val / let" data on the
heap, or perhaps easier by copying them into an implicitly built
object and interpreting the returned local function as pointer to
method of this object. The closure-object would be memory-managed as
other objects.

What do you think?
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Alberto Narduzzi
In reply to this post by Sven Barth-2
> To stress this a bit: around two weeks ago I told my "program
> optimization" teacher (who's the head of the "programing languages"
> chair) about Free Pascal (and Delphi) and he didn't know that Pascal
> "already" supports OOP... :(

don't be so sad... pass your exams, whatever it takes to, then rethink
of the whole thing on your own... ;-)
It was exactly the same 20 years ago, when Pascal _already_ supported OOP.

A.
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Sven Barth-2
In reply to this post by Lukasz Stafiniak
Am 28.02.2012 20:31, schrieb Lukasz Stafiniak:

> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Noah Silva
> <[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>
>> If you want to convince people to use FPC and are having issues, you should
>> ask them what features, exactly, they are looking for.  Chances are that FPC
>> has them.  (If they want a functional language, though, then you're out of
>> luck).
>
> Pascal is not entirely opposed to being a functional language. There
> are two missing language features (consider it a proposal of
> Functional Pascal):
>
> (1) A declaration part, that parallels "var", with keyword "val" or
> "let" (since "val" is taken up by a procedure). It introduces named
> values, i.e. non-assignable variables. The part after "=" can be any
> expression. Therefore, this feature spoils the "declaration --
> implementation divide" that is dear to Pascal.

I personally don't see a use for this... but feel free to provide a
useful example ;)

> (2) Closures. That is, making local functions that only use "const"
> arguments and "val / let" variables safe to return from the outer
> function. This can be done by allocating the "val / let" data on the
> heap, or perhaps easier by copying them into an implicitly built
> object and interpreting the returned local function as pointer to
> method of this object. The closure-object would be memory-managed as
> other objects.

Closures are already supported by Delphi 2009 and are currently being
worked on by someone in FPC.

Regards,
Sven
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

shiruba2012
Hi,


By the way, I was wrong about saying ABAP doesn't work outside of SAP BASIS in me previous example, I found their research project "caffeine" today and got it working.  Of course my next step will be to see how to make it interface with FPC. :)

Also, did anyone else notice that "tile" is now used by some standard units in FPC 2.6?

Thank you,
     Noah silva



On 2012/02/29, at 19:31, Sven Barth <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Am 28.02.2012 20:31, schrieb Lukasz Stafiniak:
>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Noah Silva
>> <[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>>
>>> If you want to convince people to use FPC and are having issues, you should
>>> ask them what features, exactly, they are looking for.  Chances are that FPC
>>> has them.  (If they want a functional language, though, then you're out of
>>> luck).
>>
>> Pascal is not entirely opposed to being a functional language. There
>> are two missing language features (consider it a proposal of
>> Functional Pascal):
>>
>> (1) A declaration part, that parallels "var", with keyword "val" or
>> "let" (since "val" is taken up by a procedure). It introduces named
>> values, i.e. non-assignable variables. The part after "=" can be any
>> expression. Therefore, this feature spoils the "declaration --
>> implementation divide" that is dear to Pascal.
>
> I personally don't see a use for this... but feel free to provide a useful example ;)
>
>> (2) Closures. That is, making local functions that only use "const"
>> arguments and "val / let" variables safe to return from the outer
>> function. This can be done by allocating the "val / let" data on the
>> heap, or perhaps easier by copying them into an implicitly built
>> object and interpreting the returned local function as pointer to
>> method of this object. The closure-object would be memory-managed as
>> other objects.
>
> Closures are already supported by Delphi 2009 and are currently being worked on by someone in FPC.
>
> Regards,
> Sven
> _______________________________________________
> fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
> http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

Sven Barth-2
Am 29.02.2012 14:02, schrieb Noa Shiruba:
> Also, did anyone else notice that "tile" is now used by some standard units in FPC 2.6?

How did you come to this conclusion? (I ask out of curiosity)

Regards,
Sven

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
12