3 ms·
> Free Pascal and Lazarus […] is amazing. No, it is less than mediocre. It has not kept up at any sufficient pace to other languages and environments. Just a s
by bmn__ 7y ago
> Free Pascal and Lazarus […] is amazing.
No, it is less than mediocre. It has not kept up at any sufficient pace to other languages and environments. Just a small excerpt because I don't have the nerve to write an exhaustive critique: bignum, first-class functions, generators, lazy lists, lexical scope, macros, namespaces. Single window in Lazarus requires recompilation that errors out in CheckLst.pas instead of being a preference somewhere in a menu.
- bjoli 7y agoWhat are your issues with scope in FPC? Namespaces have been supported since 3.0. The other things I understand though. I much prefer Pascal syntax and compilation time, but I have started reaching for c++ these days
- bmn__ 7y ago> What are your issues with scope in FPC? Simple begin/end should create a scope, cf. { … } in ES6 or Perl. Instead, to make it work, the programmer has to nest named procedures. > Namespaces have been supported since 3.0. Sorry, I did not notice. Apparently it's been available for 5 years, but the standard library or other popular libraries did not adopt the feature.