4 ms·

I'm not sure what the OP was trying to show with this. It's certainly cool and interesting to see that nim(rod) was written in pascal 11 years ago? I love Pas

by keyle 6y ago

I'm not sure what the OP was trying to show with this. It's certainly cool and interesting to see that nim(rod) was written in pascal 11 years ago? I love Pascal, I just give up on it too fast. But man it's fast, compiles fast, "easy" to use, until you start doing real world stuff.

pjmlp 6y ago
Having used all Borland compilers since Turbo Pascal 3 all the way up to around the first set of Delphi versions, and a couple of UNIX Pascal compilers as well, I wonder what is so hard for real world stuff.
- HacklesRaised 6y ago
  I read "I couldn't find libraries that did most of what I needed and I couldn't be bothered to contribute said libraries"
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Not even written in C? Because language interop is a thing, unless one is religously following the mantra of being a X-lang developer instead of embracing polyglot skills.
    - cy_hauser 6y ago
      Or unless you're coding simply because you enjoy the experience and don't care about the interop and making a wide use language at that point.
      - pjmlp 6y ago
        When I find a issue that could be more practical do in C++ instead of Java or .NET, instead of throwing away my productivity out of the window and rewrite everything into something else, I just write a tiny wrapper for what is missing and write everything else in Java or .NET languages. Just like I used to call Windows DLLs or COM libraries from TPW and Delphi. Which incidently is how Google pushes everyone to write native code on Android, as little as possible, just tiny native libraries. Even the NativeActivity is just a regular Java Activity implementation with predefined native methods declarations that the shared object is expected to fill in, to be properly called from the framework.
- ksec 6y ago
  I continue to wonder if we have even exceed Delphi in terms of RAD today. There are so many things that were better in its field, domain or niche but simple got washed out in History. It was only the other day someone commented Rails, despite its similarity in concept and execution, it is still not as good as good old Enterprise Objects Framework from NeXT.
  - jpcooper 6y ago
    What was so good about Enterprise Objects Framework? I don’t know much about Rails either, by the way.
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      It was a proper object entity relationship mapping framework to relation databases, already available in 1990's NeXTSTEP. http://www.kevra.org/TheBestOfNext/page570/page571/page573/page573.html http://www.kevra.org/TheBestOfNext/page570/page571/page573/p...
      - jpcooper 6y ago
        Thanks. Will have a read.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Depends on how you look at it, I certainly feel like using Delphi when doing .NET and Java development, which are also the development stacks that took the spotlight away from Delphi (alongside Borland's mismanagement). What they miss in regard to Delphi is proper AOT to native code capabilities, something that they should have supported (from my point of view) since version 1.0. Java had it via commercial JDKs (which only enterprises cared about), .NET via NGEN, mono aot and some research stuff like CosmOS, Singularity or Midori. However now 20 years later they are finally realising that must be an option, but that is mostly thanks to the competion from Go, Rust, Swift and friends than anything else. Interesting that you mention EOF, it eventually became WebObjects (in Java) and it was due to NeXT / Sun collaboration that J2EE was born. Many Java bashers don't realise how much influence Objective-C had in the Java ecosystem, in language features, language runtime, and yes J2EE. Regarding things being washed out of history, check out on Burroughs, VMS, Solo Pascal, Mesa, Multics, PL.8 for examples of systems programming before C was at all relevant outside Bell Labs walls, the Xerox PARS Workstations namely Interlisp-D, Mesa, Mesa/Cedar, Smalltalk or Wirths linage of Modula-2 and Oberon derived work based on Xerox PARC work. Unfortunely computer history isn't something that most computing degrees spend time on.

by keyle 6y ago

pjmlp 6y ago

Having used all Borland compilers since Turbo Pascal 3 all the way up to around the first set of Delphi versions, and a couple of UNIX Pascal compilers as well, I wonder what is so hard for real world stuff.

HacklesRaised 6y ago
I read "I couldn't find libraries that did most of what I needed and I couldn't be bothered to contribute said libraries"
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Not even written in C? Because language interop is a thing, unless one is religously following the mantra of being a X-lang developer instead of embracing polyglot skills.
  - cy_hauser 6y ago
    Or unless you're coding simply because you enjoy the experience and don't care about the interop and making a wide use language at that point.
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      When I find a issue that could be more practical do in C++ instead of Java or .NET, instead of throwing away my productivity out of the window and rewrite everything into something else, I just write a tiny wrapper for what is missing and write everything else in Java or .NET languages. Just like I used to call Windows DLLs or COM libraries from TPW and Delphi. Which incidently is how Google pushes everyone to write native code on Android, as little as possible, just tiny native libraries. Even the NativeActivity is just a regular Java Activity implementation with predefined native methods declarations that the shared object is expected to fill in, to be properly called from the framework.
ksec 6y ago
I continue to wonder if we have even exceed Delphi in terms of RAD today. There are so many things that were better in its field, domain or niche but simple got washed out in History. It was only the other day someone commented Rails, despite its similarity in concept and execution, it is still not as good as good old Enterprise Objects Framework from NeXT.
- jpcooper 6y ago
  What was so good about Enterprise Objects Framework? I don’t know much about Rails either, by the way.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    It was a proper object entity relationship mapping framework to relation databases, already available in 1990's NeXTSTEP. http://www.kevra.org/TheBestOfNext/page570/page571/page573/page573.html http://www.kevra.org/TheBestOfNext/page570/page571/page573/p...
    - jpcooper 6y ago
      Thanks. Will have a read.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Depends on how you look at it, I certainly feel like using Delphi when doing .NET and Java development, which are also the development stacks that took the spotlight away from Delphi (alongside Borland's mismanagement). What they miss in regard to Delphi is proper AOT to native code capabilities, something that they should have supported (from my point of view) since version 1.0. Java had it via commercial JDKs (which only enterprises cared about), .NET via NGEN, mono aot and some research stuff like CosmOS, Singularity or Midori. However now 20 years later they are finally realising that must be an option, but that is mostly thanks to the competion from Go, Rust, Swift and friends than anything else. Interesting that you mention EOF, it eventually became WebObjects (in Java) and it was due to NeXT / Sun collaboration that J2EE was born. Many Java bashers don't realise how much influence Objective-C had in the Java ecosystem, in language features, language runtime, and yes J2EE. Regarding things being washed out of history, check out on Burroughs, VMS, Solo Pascal, Mesa, Multics, PL.8 for examples of systems programming before C was at all relevant outside Bell Labs walls, the Xerox PARS Workstations namely Interlisp-D, Mesa, Mesa/Cedar, Smalltalk or Wirths linage of Modula-2 and Oberon derived work based on Xerox PARC work. Unfortunely computer history isn't something that most computing degrees spend time on.