El 03/07/2018 a las 14:33, Wolf escribió:
PS.: while composing this mail, Santiago wrote: Pascal needs to break
backward compatibility to advance, that is, in fact, a new language.
But if pascal is struggling to survive, let alone a new language if
you are not mozilla, google...
In which direction should Free Pascal move - lower type (range,
overflow, memory) checking demands, with the implied additional
sources for bugs, but also better speed and shorter code, a la C, or
should Free Pascal rather take the lead and move towards safer, and
more trustworthy, code, a la Rust?
Well, I am more for safer. But the problem is not that Pascal is not
safer enough (some parts could be improved, but it has a good mark) it
is about new features that need convoluted workarounds or libraries and
should be part of the language syntax.
For instance: Some functional programing, closures, anonymous functions,
concurrency, a clear use of character sets, different types of pointers.
And there are things that I would change in the current syntax, but I
suppose it is a matter of taste.
This is a topic for fpc-other ;-)
--
Saludos
Santiago A.
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
