What I want to make clear with these messages is that there already exist IDE's and that you have to position your project to attract interrest. I.e. I'm sure a project having features like Nu?±o mentions will attract attention.

A duplicatie of say, FPS, won't attract any attention.

Despite this, the question is how to get those features. I.e. we are well aware that debugging is the weak point of FPC currently, especially under Lazarus. This is a direct choice of using GDB, and interfacing with it.

The textmode IDE, includes GDB in its own exe, which has the advantage that it has more influence over debugging, and therefore provides a slightly better experience. However, as only 1 gdb can be present in an exe, it means you need 1 IDE per processor type. I.e. Nu?±o's wishlist of having an IDE that supports multiple CPU's and debugs better than Lazarus, may be incompatible with GDB.

In the end, no GDB based solution can provide a good user experience, simply because gdb doesn't support the Pascal language well enough. So ultimately to tackle the debugging problem, someone will have to write a multi-platform Pascal debugger.

In short, identifying the weak points is one think, solving them is another matter. A new IDE can, by starting from different design decisions provide a different user experience. The LCL is a thick abstraction layer, you may want to decide for a smaller one, with the advantages and disadvantages. But you most definately will run in some of the same issues other IDEs run into.

Don't let that prevent you from writing an IDE. All IDE's started because someone wasn't happy with the existing ones. But do know what you are starting to work on, and in what way you think you can improve on the existing ones. Just saying "Lazarus is crap" and starting your own one without having considered what you want to make and how, is probably not a recipe for success.