In our previous episode, Ryan Joseph said: > > But putting classes on the stack is a core feature which is very well used > and great for performance (why people still use c++ for games). Why isn?t > that useful?
Most seem to be covered already by having records-with-methods. The only issue is that it is a different kind of "object". > So many of the stupid memory management patterns we use in Pascal could > be replaced if the language had some good support for it. C++ does it and > on the other end ARC languages do it for you, albeit at a performance > loss. I think if you want to pursue this, you must be much more concrete. Both the benefits and the potential pitfalls. > Maybe I don?t know who the market for Pascal is anymore because to me it > seems like a legacy language which is being kept alive by a small group of > hobbyist but never actually used for any real world application This is patently false. Both Delphi and FPC are used professionally. > I?ve already pretty much given up writing Mac apps with Pascal because > it?s so hard to keep up to date and Swift is better than Objective-C but > I?d like to keep using it for games if I can. At the end of the day I > really want to be able to say at least Pascal is a good low-level language > for writing fast code but in the face of C++ that?s kind of dubious claim. The dubious claim is the suggestion that detail language features are the main cause for language uptake. It isn't. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
