In our previous episode, Guillermo Mart?nez Jim?nez said: > > I think the problem here (again) is not the language, it's the critical > > mass of users of the language. Using C for Linux was a good bet, not > > because the language is good (Pascal is way better for me), but because C > > has a wider user base who can fix/add features. > > I disagree. C is better for write operating systems *by definition*: > C was created to write UNIX, Pascal was created to learn good > programming techniques. C is low/mid-level language, Pascal is > high-level (and Object Pascal is even higher): OS are the lowest > software level.
I don't see that at all. Sure original Pascal started and ended a bit higher. But this is a Free Pascal list, and Free Pascal and Delphi can get down and dirty too. There sure isn't much in C that FPC can not do. And the few bits that miss (if any) would probably be added soon when major OS development would start. I think it is more a matter of FPC being geared towards apps development as a compiler than a matter of language. > I'm not saying it's impossible: here you have MacOS and Toro. I'm > just saying that _I think_ it isn't the best option. Of course a > better option is to write the kernel in C and Assembler and the > utilities in Pascal and Object Pascal. Well, it is a pity that there is so much routine discussion in this thread that seems to boil down to a dogmatic kneejerk "C is better, C has always been better, because Linux/Unix was programmed in it", and so little real funded argumentation why this is really the case. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal