On Mon, 16 Nov 2009, Anthony Walter wrote:
As I said in my introduction. I am new to Linux and FPC. I've used
them both for maybe 8 years, but not seriously.
On the Linux side for years I've just used it for minimal compiling
and a lot of web browser.
On the FPC I've fired it up from time to time over the years (and read
the website, mailing lists).
None of that I consider real use, just casual poking around.
But now I am taking a serious stab at porting my Windows OpenGL game
engine to a cross platform Windows, Linux, and Mac engine. I feel like
I am actually doing something real with Linux and FPC for the first
time.
One thing I've noticed about the FPC community which has me a somewhat
apprehensive is a bit of a particular attitude I've picked up on.
A few times now I've read comments by or had conversations with people
in the FPC community who have explained incompatibilities away using
the phrase:
"FreePascal did this before something else so we shouldn't change"
Forgetting the whole argument about who was actually first, I have to
ask what difference does it make?
Why does doing something first make it written in stone. It seems a
bit childish to say, "No way, I way here first, I won't budge. You
move."
Really, that attitude is quite the turn off.
Correct, but then the same applies to Borland/Codegear/Embarcadero.
Go ahead, and ask them to be more FPC compliant.
It'll be interesting to see their reaction.
People take such a position from Borland, but not from FPC. Why ?
This is quite ironic, because you PAY Borland and you put up with their
attitudes. You don't pay FPC but you also don't want to put up with our
attitudes. Where is the logic in that ? I would expect the opposite.
You pay them for god's sake, so they should do your bidding...
In reality it's always the FPC team that is f*d when an incompatibility arises.
Michael.
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
