Frank Heckenbach wrote:
Hi everybody,
since GPC development has mostly stalled, I've thought about if and how its development could be continued. Here are my current thoughts about it. Since the text is quite long, I put it on the web: http://fjf.gnu.de/gpc-future.html
My 2 cents:
GPC has been a good project, and backed the standard when few others did. Although I don't think you can assume that FPC is that much better (they regularly complain about lack of developers), it seems that at least some of the following factors helped:
1. Complete compatibility with the Borland dielect.
2. Having the compiler itself written in its own language (Borland Delphi).
Although a rewrite of GPC in Pascal is interesting, I don't think it would help. It is a huge undertaking, and it still would not result in an all-Pascal project, since it must integrate with the GCC backend.
One suggestion I could make is that you might think about taking your knowledge and expertise into the FPC project. Just as GPC was a ISO 7185 compiler that added Borland compatibility, there is no reason why GPC elements such as ISO 7185 and ISO 10206 compatibility cannot be integrated into FPC. In fact, the FPC group has talked about ISO 7185 compatibility for quite some time now, they just don't see it as a priority. Most of the differences between FPC and ISO 7185 are covered by simple addition of missing features, and the few that are mutually exclusive between ISO 7185 and Borland dielects can be covered by a compiler option.
My agenda, for anyone who knows me, is to see the original Pascal standard spread (as created by Wirth). However, I think the above comments make sense even if you are not a backer of original Pascal.
Just a thought.
Scott Moore http://www.standardpascal.org