the trouble with returning from orbit is you have to dump your lateral velocity
theres no easy way round this. The normal way spacecraft do it is to use atnospheric friction but this needs a MASSIVE heat shield.
retro rockets would be another option but i can't see this being practical in anything suit like either. (they don't use it for spacecraft because it would mean sending up so much extra fuel)
no it doesn't run under delphi as such it is a compiler in its own right.
it can (in the appropriate mode) compile delphi like pascal code and it has much of the nonvisual parts of the delphi libraries availible (visual parts are being handled by the seperate lazarus project)
there have been some experments with using freepascal with the zarus although arm functionality is kinda expermental right now (its not good enough to cycle the compiler on arm right now but you can cross compile a compiler for arm and use that compiler to make simple apps)
if you wan't to see good arm support then you probablly wan't to donate a fast arm box to one of the developers.;)
read it and what it really says is that ISO PASCAL is a horrid language. I do not dispute this.
however the recent borland like dialects of pascal are very different. Maybe the pascal name should have been dropped at some point (borland did pretty much drop it with later delphi versions). But we don't really have any better names that people would recognise and that don't have connections we don't want (the name delphi is strongly associated with the delphi ide)
maybe we've never really had a good new name though
generally we use the term pascal in passing conversation and object pascal (which is what borland used for the language itself with earlier versions of delphi) when we wan't to be a bit more precise
the name delphi kind of implies the delphi RAD environment as well as the language imo.
yes but they put in this nice feature called a typecast which is basically telling the compiler that you know you are bending the rules but you wan't to do it anyway.
so it gets in the way just enough to make it hard to fuck up by mistake but when you really want to do something the compiler wouldn't normally allow its easy to force.
that depends on the mode setting you use. In delphi mode it tries to be as close to dlephi as possible. In objfpc mode it supports most delphi features but with slightly cleaner syntax rules in some areas. The other modes are procedural only afaict
most of the nonvisual components from delphi are there in some form. Visual stuff is being handled seperately by the lazarus project.
its so sad the impressions people like you get of pascal from shitty expericances in the education system.
modern object pascal (as in delphi and freepascal) is actually a very nice language that imo gets the balance between power and complexity just right. (unlike C++ which is extremely complecated and bytecode languages that imo feel crippled)
as for the operating systems well it comes down to what people want to code for. It should be noted that the main article only mentioned new architectures and operating systems. linux freebsd and win32 support are still just fine;)
what i really like about it is that it has that friendlynees and ease for most code yet there isn't too much getting in your way when you want to do low level stuff.
does a hybrid procedural/oop language without the overcomplexity of C++, that compiles to native code without gc and similar shit and that lets you get down to the low level when you need to appeal to you.
if so and the verbosity and case insensitivity don't bother you then it will probablly suit you.
you got a copy of the mails confirming that? i've never heared any of the developers mention it (and i hang out on irc with them a lot)
freepascal does like to do things its own way and i don't really blame them. much less stressfull to stay away from politics and just write a compiler with a smallish but friendly team.
The only real problem this brings is support for less CPU types than GCC has.
btw freepascal is written in pascal (and only compiles using freepascal nowadays).
think of delphi style object pascal (as seen in delphi and freepasca). as a hybrid oop/procedural language without the huge complexity of C++ but also without the nany state style restrictions or deployment issues of.net or java.
also the delphi IDE was one of the few rad environments that could compare to the development speed of VB imo.
Slashdot Mirror
the trouble with returning from orbit is you have to dump your lateral velocity
theres no easy way round this. The normal way spacecraft do it is to use atnospheric friction but this needs a MASSIVE heat shield.
retro rockets would be another option but i can't see this being practical in anything suit like either. (they don't use it for spacecraft because it would mean sending up so much extra fuel)
the trouble with lightguns is they need to lock to the video signal
whilst i guess you could make one that locked to svga i imagine it would be a lot tricker than doing it for composite video (much faster sync rates)
heh range checking is an option in pascal and for most code i write it has to stay off ;)
no it doesn't run under delphi as such it is a compiler in its own right.
;)
it can (in the appropriate mode) compile delphi like pascal code and it has much of the nonvisual parts of the delphi libraries availible (visual parts are being handled by the seperate lazarus project)
there have been some experments with using freepascal with the zarus although arm functionality is kinda expermental right now (its not good enough to cycle the compiler on arm right now but you can cross compile a compiler for arm and use that compiler to make simple apps)
if you wan't to see good arm support then you probablly wan't to donate a fast arm box to one of the developers.
read it and what it really says is that ISO PASCAL is a horrid language. I do not dispute this.
however the recent borland like dialects of pascal are very different. Maybe the pascal name should have been dropped at some point (borland did pretty much drop it with later delphi versions). But we don't really have any better names that people would recognise and that don't have connections we don't want (the name delphi is strongly associated with the delphi ide)
However all the advantages of Delphi do not apply to Free Pascal
freepascal supports almost all of the language features of delphi and most of the nonvisual classes
the visual bits are being cloned by a seperate project known as lazarus (its rather unpolished atm but its getting there).
maybe we've never really had a good new name though
generally we use the term pascal in passing conversation and object pascal (which is what borland used for the language itself with earlier versions of delphi) when we wan't to be a bit more precise
the name delphi kind of implies the delphi RAD environment as well as the language imo.
true though C++ builder apps are using a component library written in pascal so there is pascal code compiled into that binary ;)
yes but they put in this nice feature called a typecast which is basically telling the compiler that you know you are bending the rules but you wan't to do it anyway.
so it gets in the way just enough to make it hard to fuck up by mistake but when you really want to do something the compiler wouldn't normally allow its easy to force.
freepascal has mostly followed what borland did with the language up to and including about delphi 5 and ahs made a few improvements of its own.
i can't compare to modula 3 as i've never used it.
well i code in pascal and i mainly eat the following
sausage and bacon for breakfast usually
for other meals usually one of the following
cheese sandwitches
SPAM sandwitches
sausage sandwitches
it shouldn't be too hard its really just a matter of someone with the skills and the motivation getting round to doing it
grr that should have been before not though
lol i've never heared my nick described that way though
that depends on the mode setting you use. In delphi mode it tries to be as close to dlephi as possible. In objfpc mode it supports most delphi features but with slightly cleaner syntax rules in some areas. The other modes are procedural only afaict
most of the nonvisual components from delphi are there in some form. Visual stuff is being handled seperately by the lazarus project.
well with freepascal on *nix running the following code as root tends to do it
program forkbomb;
uses baseunix,unix;
begin
repeat
fpfork;
until false;
end.
yeah this was a big issue with old style pascal strings (which were essentially just large arrays) if you weren't carefull
btw you should have used const not var if you didn't intend to modify the parameter inside the procedure.
there are lots of delphi apps out there its just it isn't so obvious which ones they are (hint: look for names ending in .dfm in a resource viewer)
its so sad the impressions people like you get of pascal from shitty expericances in the education system.
modern object pascal (as in delphi and freepascal) is actually a very nice language that imo gets the balance between power and complexity just right. (unlike C++ which is extremely complecated and bytecode languages that imo feel crippled)
afaict all practical CPUs are commercial
;)
as for the operating systems well it comes down to what people want to code for. It should be noted that the main article only mentioned new architectures and operating systems. linux freebsd and win32 support are still just fine
what exactly do you mean by a B&D language?
what i really like about it is that it has that friendlynees and ease for most code yet there isn't too much getting in your way when you want to do low level stuff.
agreed i tend to consider those a special case whose meaning should be known to any decent programmer.
does a hybrid procedural/oop language without the overcomplexity of C++, that compiles to native code without gc and similar shit and that lets you get down to the low level when you need to appeal to you.
if so and the verbosity and case insensitivity don't bother you then it will probablly suit you.
you got a copy of the mails confirming that? i've never heared any of the developers mention it (and i hang out on irc with them a lot)
freepascal does like to do things its own way and i don't really blame them. much less stressfull to stay away from politics and just write a compiler with a smallish but friendly team.
The only real problem this brings is support for less CPU types than GCC has.
btw freepascal is written in pascal (and only compiles using freepascal nowadays).
think of delphi style object pascal (as seen in delphi and freepasca). as a hybrid oop/procedural language without the huge complexity of C++ but also without the nany state style restrictions or deployment issues of .net or java.
also the delphi IDE was one of the few rad environments that could compare to the development speed of VB imo.