Sorry, but there has been so much nonsense in this thread, I just had to
add my 2c as well.
On 10/15/2024 4:07 PM, Rainer Stratmann via fpc-pascal wrote:
At the Lazarus Congress in Cologne in October 2024, it ended up being very
interesting. An important question came up.
Why are no new users coming to Lazarus/Freepascal?
Why do we find it so difficult?
How can we get new, younger users to come to us?
The same questions came up over a year ago at a Freepascal/Lazarus meeting in
Backnang.
I have some answers:
- The official Freepascal website doesn't look like the project is very lively.
An absolute non-factor. Yes, the "Latest News" seems to be dated, but
then I would prefer people involved in the project work on compiler
related issues rather than on web sites.
The latest FPC announcement is now 3 years ago, but then the overall
release cycle is much slower than on a lot of other projects, but by and
large, I could consider this a good thing....
- Lazarus looks very complicated with its many windows. And it is also
relatively complicated to understand and use. There are too many options that
are too nested.
Well, what is so complicated about it? Of course, you need to know what
you are doing. Maybe some windows could be hidden until they might be
used (like Watches, Evaluate/modify, or debugger), and they are easily
activated from the Window menu. But if you are really programming, it
actually make sense.
Is Lazarus "perfect"? Probably not, but IMHO, it is light years better
and easier to use like abominations like Visual Studio (Code, yes, I
know they are not the same) or any of that Eclipse based stuff. And
definitely FAR more lightweight than any of those.
- Crosscompiling: The compiler file name is hidden in Tools - Settings instead
of in the project settings. I found this out after some time. Since it was
nowhere to be found in the project settings I first thought it might be hard-
coded!
That doesn't make any sense! Yeah, cross-compiling could be made it bit
more obvious, but then in a lot of the "alternatives", you can't
cross-compile at all. And then, if you properly design your software,
this isn't a task that you do a couple of dozen times and hour...
- Linux: All relevant files (executable files, configuration files, source code,
etc.) are scattered all over the Linux system. This is very complicated again.
If Lazarus/Freepascal were a Linux system program it would make sense. But it
is NOT a Linux system program. The chance that it will be used by several
users on a multi-user system is close to zero.
non-issue IMHP
- Fpcupdeluxe: A good idea. But it doesn't work. I have tried to install an
AVR crosscompiler on a Linux system. Fatal: Can't find unit Infodrwf used by
Project1. And ‘Project1’ does not use any unit at all.
don't care, never used it in all the years that I am using FPC (going
back when it was still called FPK) and Lazarus.
- For a new installation of Lazarus: The most important quick start icons have
to be configured again at the bottom of the source code window. So that fast
and smooth work is possible. Instead of placing them like this from the start.
The many confusing windows I have already mentioned above.
You completely lost me on this one.... 😕
As good as Freepascal is. The situation described above is a brake pad and
sooner or later leads to a dead end.
Maybe you need to look at your overall approach to (application)
programming, not as FPC/Lazarus being another Python (or whatever is the
rad programming language de jour)
My tip is to put all the required files in one directory. This also makes it
easier to install an installation on the different systems. Only one ZIP file is
then required. And you can even install it without internet access.
I don't see the general problem here. By and large, FPC (and Lazarus) is
installed rather quickly. What I however miss is an option to transfer a
(general) configuration from one system to another, specially between
different OS, as I do most of my work on Windows 1[0,1] but some of my
application also need to be tested and worked on on Linux or macOS. This
cross-platform capability is IMHO one of the reasons why you couldn't
just "put everything into one directory". The directory structure,
including permissions, is simply different for each of them.
If I would have some serious complains, it would be that in the last few
years at least some of the developers have paid too much attention to
include all those (supposedly) fancy new paradigms instead of the core
of programming in Pascal. Even Object Pascal, though IMHO not every
little thing needs to be put into objects/classes when there really
isn't any gain from it. Some times, commonly used functions might be
clearer and thus easier to understand and maintain written in procedural
form.
As far as Lazarus is concerned, the only thing that just keeps bugging
me is that there is no ability to "just compile" a file that is
currently active in the editor, to test it for syntactical
correctness/typos, without having to create a separate test project each
and every time or recompiling it in the context of a larger application.
This could be one thing that could make it easier for newbies to Pascal
to get started, specially when at first dealing with non-GUI programs.
Translated withwww.deepl.com
Ist Dein Problem möglicherweise dass Deine Englischkenntinisse nicht die
Besten sind und Du deshalb einige der Strukturen nicht verstehst?
Ralf
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
