3 ms·

What are the advantages over FPC/Lazarus?

gattilorenz 5y ago
- First and foremost, it's not Pascal, but the more elegant Objective-C. - You can in theory compile sources for NeXT/OpenSTEP or early OS X applications with minimal changes[1], while FPC would require you to rewrite them completely. - Different GUI components, inspired/based on the *STEP design. Realistically, I guess you're better off using Lazarus for anything new, nowadays. [1] The original DOOM editor was developed for NeXT machines, and the sources surfaced a few years ago. Here it is running under Ubuntu with Window Maker and GNUStep: https://www.doomworld.com/forum/topic/111229-redoomed-maclinuxbsd-port-of-id-softwares-1993-doom-map-editor-for-nextstep/ https://www.doomworld.com/forum/topic/111229-redoomed-maclin...
- badsectoracula 5y ago
  > First and foremost, it's not Pascal, but the more elegant Objective-C. That depends on the beholder and their eye :-P.
  - Koshkin 5y ago
    Well, no doubt the curly braces look… curlier!
  - tored 5y ago
    I like the procedural version of Pascal, with records, procedures and units, however the more modern Pascal that you can find in FreePascal where you have to either inherit or implement a class for any advanced container is cumbersome.
    - badsectoracula 5y ago
      The language had support for dynamic arrays for ages and the intrinsic functions like insert, etc have been extended to work with them in latest version (i'm not 100% sure if this is available in the latest relase, but it is available in the trunk). So for simple stuff that should work. But yeah the containers that FPC provides are indeed cumbersome and i blame Delphi for that and FPC's insistence on copying all those bad features (ok, i understand the need to remain compatible so people can switch to FPC, but they can always provide better tools too - perhaps they're burned from when they implemented generics first and then Delphi implemented theirs in an incompatible way and now they have to support both). On the other hand, you can make your own and i have mine which can use any old data structure, be it primitives, records or classes.
  - gattilorenz 5y ago
    Absolutely :)
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

- First and foremost, it's not Pascal, but the more elegant Objective-C. - You can in theory compile sources for NeXT/OpenSTEP or early OS X applications with minimal changes[1], while FPC would require you to rewrite them completely. - Different GUI components, inspired/based on the *STEP design. Realistically, I guess you're better off using Lazarus for anything new, nowadays. [1] The original DOOM editor was developed for NeXT machines, and the sources surfaced a few years ago. Here it is running under Ubuntu with Window Maker and GNUStep: https://www.doomworld.com/forum/topic/111229-redoomed-maclinuxbsd-port-of-id-softwares-1993-doom-map-editor-for-nextstep/ https://www.doomworld.com/forum/topic/111229-redoomed-maclin...

badsectoracula 5y ago
> First and foremost, it's not Pascal, but the more elegant Objective-C. That depends on the beholder and their eye :-P.
- Koshkin 5y ago
  Well, no doubt the curly braces look… curlier!
- tored 5y ago
  I like the procedural version of Pascal, with records, procedures and units, however the more modern Pascal that you can find in FreePascal where you have to either inherit or implement a class for any advanced container is cumbersome.
  - badsectoracula 5y ago
    The language had support for dynamic arrays for ages and the intrinsic functions like insert, etc have been extended to work with them in latest version (i'm not 100% sure if this is available in the latest relase, but it is available in the trunk). So for simple stuff that should work. But yeah the containers that FPC provides are indeed cumbersome and i blame Delphi for that and FPC's insistence on copying all those bad features (ok, i understand the need to remain compatible so people can switch to FPC, but they can always provide better tools too - perhaps they're burned from when they implemented generics first and then Delphi implemented theirs in an incompatible way and now they have to support both). On the other hand, you can make your own and i have mine which can use any old data structure, be it primitives, records or classes.
- gattilorenz 5y ago
  Absolutely :)
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]