On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Michael Van Canneyt <mich...@freepascal.org> wrote: > > Where to start ? > > Go is a very nice language, but is very difficult to get to work with > external libraries. Writing imports can be next to impossible. > Our server needs to do LOTS of things that simply cannot be done in Go, > since Go doesn't have the necessary functionality (or libraries, or modules) > so we'd need to offload that to C libs, which kind of defeats the purpose. > > Java would be a possibility, but > > a) I don't know Java so well. Java is HUGE. > > b) Then you need to deal with the Java VM and Tomcat and whatnot. > Not pleasant. Recently we had a java service completely unresponsive for > 30 seconds, it was doing GC... Not acceptable at all. > > Node.js is nice for some scripting, but IMO Javascript is not suitable for > large > applications. Complete absence of type checking or any form of compilation > is a disaster for large projects. > > Additionally, when using Node.js, you almost inevitably come into contact > with npm. > We built some mobile apps using a web runtime, and typical usage for Node.js > is packaging of the app. This typically uses npm. > > npm pulled in 1200+ npm packages (100+mb), to pack an application of 1200 > lines > of javascript. Not a joke. I actually checked. And to pack an application in > essence means: > creating a zip. IMO the people using node.js and npm are deluded, to allow > such a mess. > > Suffices that 1 of the 1200 packages for what reason whatsoever is broken, > retracted or whatnot: the whole system comes crashing down... > > (The upcoming pas2js can target node.js, and I am confident you will not > need npm.) > > To make matters worse, javascript developers have no sense of time. > They actually think that completely breaking backwards compatibility after 2 > years is OK. > For example, the change of Angular to Angular 2 (and subsequent changes) > made me decide that Angular is unsuitable for development - despite all the > nifty features. > > The average lifetime of applications I make is many many years. > So, backwards compatibility is VERY important. > > So. For all these reasons, I use Object Pascal. I can take my 10 year old > application, recompile, and be reasonably sure it will still work.
WOW... Actually, you have good reasons. I liked. I am asking this because sometimes I cannot make a project if I say that will be coded in Object Pascal. I have heard a client saying: We use C# or <choose one>. We don't have more Pascal programmers to maintain this. To develop desktop apps, it's not a problem. But if it will be a web app, could be. I will use your text, next time. :) About performance, do you believe that FastCGI is good or even better than these other technologies? Best regards, Marcos Douglas -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus-ide.org https://lists.lazarus-ide.org/listinfo/lazarus
