On Thu, 25 Feb 2016, Serguei TARASSOV wrote:
Mr Bee wrote
Sometimes I just don't understand the policy of FPC devs about Delphi
compatibility. In some cases, they said FPC isn't a slave of Delphi, FPC
should have better goal than Delphi, there's the Delphi way and there's
the FPC way, breaking old codes is consequence of a change, bla bla bla….
In the absence of standard, there is no way.
All depends on several core developers (FPC) or on corporate policy
(Delphi).
The Delphi way is less poor but both are risky.
Oh, why is that ?
The absence of standards is the most weak point of Object Pascal/Delphi and
its "standard" libraries.
We could not be more in agreement.
However, I wish to point out that FPC here is always in the disadvantage:
Borland/Inprise/Embarcadero/Idera has consistently denied to cooperate on this.
(whether or not this is a company policy, or because they simply ignore us, I do not know).
When FPC implemented a language feature first, they later implemented it
differently.
To give an example:
When Jonas designed the objective C classes for Mac OS X, he explicitly mailed
them to ask
what they were going to do. He got a noncommittal answer.
By contrast, when we implement a feature that Delphi has, we always implement it in a
compatible way in $MODE Delphi.
When doing base classes, we make sure that we provide all identifiers that Delphi
provides, so your code compiles.
If someone reports a missing identifier, we always attempt to implement it.
I don't see what we can do more ?
Michael.
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
