Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Objective comparison between FreePascal/Lazarus and Delphi

  1. #11
    Hello.

    I am not biased towards Delphi or FPC\L, if I am biased towards anything it is Pascal language in general ;-)

    What I do like in FPC\Lazarus compared to Delphi:

    IDE is faster and does not need the .NET crap!!
    Crossplatform possibilities - does it require any comments? FPC + OpenGL + SDL is way to go!!!
    If you discover a bug and report it, you will get a response (response not fix) in a matter of day or even hours. I've reported two bugs so far, and one has been solved in one day and the other in one week. I think it is very fast compared to Delphi in which some bug exists for years.

    What I miss in FPC\Lazarus

    The ability to see a mistake in your code in the time you made it. Delphi underlines erroneus code with red "line". (Altought this feature is sometimes buggy atleast in Delphi 2007)
    The native debbuger. Delphi debugger is way better, and I doubt that the debugger for FPC will be ever released. However, I fully understand how complicated thing is to write one for crossplatform language. So it is on my big whish list but I accept the reality ;-)

  2. #12
    +1 to FPC/Lazarus Support! It is very good!

    I posted some questions and I had reply in a matter of hours!

  3. #13
    Co-Founder / PGD Elder WILL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,107
    Blog Entries
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by wagenheimer View Post
    +1 to FPC/Lazarus Support! It is very good!

    I posted some questions and I had reply in a matter of hours!
    This doesn't always happen. I posted a suggestion/comment about a problem in documentation and I got told to go fix it myself. No additional information on where to look for the correct information or how elaboration on my problem. I was also being accused of being lazy.
    Jason McMillen
    Pascal Game Development
    Co-Founder





  4. #14
    Just wanted to let you all know that I am compiling and collating these (and some of my own) into a list which I am planning to edit into my original post. I would like to expand into some details as well, but I'll get to that shortly.

    The main goal is a "quick reference" with details that can be amended as time goes on (as well as helping me decide on tools; I like to turn my research efforts into something more broadly usable by others; I might as well, the work is being done anyway ).

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by WILL View Post
    This doesn't always happen. I posted a suggestion/comment about a problem in documentation and I got told to go fix it myself. No additional information on where to look for the correct information or how elaboration on my problem. I was also being accused of being lazy.
    That, sadly, is all-too-common in a lot of FOSS projects. Documentation is always the red-headed stepchild, and those who point out deficiencies in such a critical resource all too often get treated similarly.

    There is simply no need for that kind of treatment, IMHO. All it takes is a little bit of effort to put in a bit of documentation infrastructure, say a basic wiki or outlining system, and gentle / courteous encouragements as well as enthusiastically answering queries by people who are doing the documentation effort.

  6. #16
    Co-Founder / PGD Elder WILL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,107
    Blog Entries
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Murmandamus View Post
    Just wanted to let you all know that I am compiling and collating these (and some of my own) into a list which I am planning to edit into my original post. I would like to expand into some details as well, but I'll get to that shortly.

    The main goal is a "quick reference" with details that can be amended as time goes on (as well as helping me decide on tools; I like to turn my research efforts into something more broadly usable by others; I might as well, the work is being done anyway ).
    If you would like to article-ize it and put it into the next issue of Pascal Gamer I'd be happy to publish it. As long as it doesn't bash any one party or speculate too much.

    Re: Documentation-Debacle....

    Yeah I was pretty disappointed. I think it might have been one of the core team members too. There was another of the core members (I believe Vincent, who I have a great deal of respect for) who did offer some information that explained some of the issues, but I really never got any information that would have helped in my hope to update the documentation to add what I felt was missing. It seems the core development team is pretty de-centralized and not really united in a common goal for the software. At least not that I've seen. The Laz team could use more structuring I think.
    Jason McMillen
    Pascal Game Development
    Co-Founder





  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by WILL View Post
    The Laz team could use more structuring I think.
    I think what it needs is more contributors
    Peregrinus, expectavi pedes meos in cymbalis
    Nullus norvegicorum sole urinat

  8. #18
    Debuger is miles away.
    Last edited by arthurprs; 10-02-2011 at 02:06 PM.
    From brazil (:

    Pascal pownz!

  9. #19
    Co-Founder / PGD Elder WILL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,107
    Blog Entries
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by JSoftware View Post
    I think what it needs is more contributors
    That kind of falls into the 'too many cooks spoil the soup' scenario. More coders doesn't make a better project nessissarily. Yes the project could benefit from more people to tackle the LCL problem (huge workload, not enough coders to do it all), but there are other problems that plague the project that have nothing to do with the amount of coders contributing to it.

    The biggest issue is that the original project leader seemingly bailed and others have been juggling the project as best they can. Kudos to them, but I've not seen much of an organizational structure published on the Lazarus site nor have I seen some kind of 'creative roadmap' other than a list of incomplete features yet to be completed. That doesn't mean that there isn't an organized core team, but publicly there isn't much of a presence which doesn't help to invite those seeking help or wanting to contribute. Mantis alone doesn't make a very good PR campaign to bring in more coders unfortunately.

    It's not an easy project to run and manage. It has huge goals (some we've seen completed mostly!) and requires a lot of man-power to complete them. Hell I have a hard enough time trying to get help on this site, so I understand. It's just realistically the project lacks in PR management. If they could solve that then a lot of things like documentation and public interest will sort themselves out in the course of time.
    Jason McMillen
    Pascal Game Development
    Co-Founder





  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by WILL View Post
    If you would like to article-ize it and put it into the next issue of Pascal Gamer I'd be happy to publish it. As long as it doesn't bash any one party or speculate too much.
    I'm not interested in bashing anybody or speculating. Just the facts, and what they mean to me as a developer.

    Yeah I was pretty disappointed. I think it might have been one of the core team members too. There was another of the core members (I believe Vincent, who I have a great deal of respect for) who did offer some information that explained some of the issues, but I really never got any information that would have helped in my hope to update the documentation to add what I felt was missing. It seems the core development team is pretty de-centralized and not really united in a common goal for the software. At least not that I've seen. The Laz team could use more structuring I think.
    I think my main issue with both FP/L projects is the AWFUL websites. It is hard to find anything, and there are multiple places where you find similar information, but one version hasn't been updated in years, and another is woefully incomplete. So, I think it comes as no surprise that the organization at higher levels in the project is lacking; it is reflected in the public face of the projects. If it were up to me, that is the first thing I would tackle. With a better, more accurate, more efficient public face, it might attract more people to the project.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •