Am 29.03.2013 11:27, schrieb Martin Schreiber: > On Friday 29 March 2013 10:53:04 Jürgen Hestermann wrote: >> Am 2013-03-29 10:35, schrieb Sven Barth: >>> We value backwards compatiblity very high and this is part of it, no >>> matter whether these c-like operators are considered good or bad... >> >> But that's not the point here. The problem has nothing to do with backward >> compatibility. Just the opposite. If you incorporate each and every >> "feature" from any other language then you no longer have Pascal. The end >> would be that you can write whatever language you want, the compiler will >> understand it. This may look like a benefit but after all you cannot be >> sure to understand source code written for this compiler anymore. It would >> require learning all the many languages that exist within "Object Pascal". >> To program nowadays it already requires a lot of other things to learn >> (different OSs and interfaces). I see no need to add even more to that by >> adding features over and over again. Pascal was successful because it was >> easy and clear. Now it becomes complex and cluttered. >> > Agreed. It is propably time now to make an new attempt for an open > source "Pascal-like" compiler which is not forced to follow Delphi and can > learn from the pros and cons of Free Pascal without the ballast of backwards > compatibility from 20 years.
Indeed. First, we should get rid of this sting type mess and concentrate on good utf-8 support. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
