Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Jonas Maebe]

On 01 Mar 2012, at 09:29, Noa Shiruba wrote:

It's not used as a unit name, but there might be "something"   
"somewhere" hiding, so I am not ready to file a bug report on it yet.


It's probably better to make another demo program with less cruft.


It's possible that compiling with -vh will make the compiler tell you  
where it was previously defined.



Jonas___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Noa Shiruba]

Sven,

It's not used as a unit name, but there might be "something"  "somewhere" 
hiding, so I am not ready to file a bug report on it yet.

It's probably better to make another demo program with less cruft.

-- Noah 

On 2012/03/01, at 16:13, Sven Barth  wrote:

> Am 01.03.2012 01:43, schrieb Noa Shiruba:
>> Hi Sven,
>> 
>> Several of my programs stopped compiling with "duplicate identifier" errors 
>> where I had something like:
>> 
>> Var Tile:TOSMTile;
>> 
>> I thing the offending unit was Graphics, but I am not 100% sure.
>> 
>> (I just did search and replace of Tile to MapTile in my code to fix it once 
>> I realized the conflicting definition Was coming from one of the standard 
>> units).
> 
> This is strange. As leledumbo said a "duplicated identifier" error should 
> only appear if you used "tile" inside the current unit already. Are you sure 
> you didn't use it as unit name? If you can still reproduce it when you use 
> "tile" again, can you narrow down the problem and please report a bug if it's 
> not an oversight by you?
> 
> Regards,
> Sven
> 
> ___
> fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
> http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Sven Barth]

Am 01.03.2012 01:43, schrieb Noa Shiruba:

Hi Sven,

Several of my programs stopped compiling with "duplicate identifier" errors 
where I had something like:

Var Tile:TOSMTile;

I thing the offending unit was Graphics, but I am not 100% sure.

(I just did search and replace of Tile to MapTile in my code to fix it once I 
realized the conflicting definition Was coming from one of the standard units).


This is strange. As leledumbo said a "duplicated identifier" error 
should only appear if you used "tile" inside the current unit already. 
Are you sure you didn't use it as unit name? If you can still reproduce 
it when you use "tile" again, can you narrow down the problem and please 
report a bug if it's not an oversight by you?


Regards,
Sven

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Noa Shiruba]

Hi Sven,

Several of my programs stopped compiling with "duplicate identifier" errors 
where I had something like:

Var Tile:TOSMTile;

I thing the offending unit was Graphics, but I am not 100% sure.

(I just did search and replace of Tile to MapTile in my code to fix it once I 
realized the conflicting definition Was coming from one of the standard units).

Thank you,
  Noah Silva

On 2012/02/29, at 22:27, Sven Barth  wrote:

> 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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
> http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Sven Barth]

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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Noa Shiruba]

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  wrote:

> Am 28.02.2012 20:31, schrieb Lukasz Stafiniak:
>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Noah Silva
>>   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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
> http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Sven Barth]

Am 28.02.2012 20:31, schrieb Lukasz Stafiniak:

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Noah Silva
  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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Alberto Narduzzi]

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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Lukasz Stafiniak]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Noah Silva
 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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Marcos Douglas]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Lars  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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Noa Shiruba]

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  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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
> http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Sven Barth]

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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Noah Silva]

Hi,

2012/2/28 Lars 

> 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.

> Ho

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Lars]

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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Rich Saunders]

On 2/27/12 10:33 AM, Noa Shiruba wrote:
> On 2012/02/27, at 23:14, Frank Church  > 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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: What is the most widely used Pascal on Linux and other Unix variants?

[Noa Shiruba]

Hi,

On 2012/02/27, at 23:14, Frank Church  wrote:

> 
> 
> On 27 February 2012 10:15, Frank Church  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  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
> http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal