caseih wrote:Sure if you program Pascal without using any component libraries (perhaps using win32 directly), then FreePascal and FreeBASIC are about equivalent.
Roughly yes. There is even a book
about the core api, and another one
about GDI drawing. Good finds in 2nd hand shops (though I assume now harder to find then e.g. 10 years ago)
They are like Petzold with Pascal syntax and compilable projects on the CDs (for D6/7), roughly Win ME/Windows 2000 SDK era, iow just before Windows XP, but to get a quick introduction they are quite nice.
Cretin Ho wrote:
Doing so one will lost all of the RAD ability of Lazarus to boost the job and now it's really down to language A vs language B again since both now use the same Windows API.
Or simply don't needlessly make size the centre of the universe.
I have noticed that Lazarus files are bigger than Delphi, but it is a complete package. One does not require any of the runtime DLLs or other support files if you wish to deploy a program. The .EXE is enough.
The difference is slight or not even there depending on the version of Delphi. More modern unicode Delphi versions are much bulkier too.
But it is easy to make size comparison mistakes, because Lazarus debug info is bulkier on some targets.
dodicat wrote:This is kind of like my deliberations with marcov recently relating to pascal.
Thus I miss the whole point of lazarus, but unfortunately the freepascal forum is all about lazarus.
There are freepascal specific subforums too, but flow is higher in Lazarus related. Though in many topics logic can be easily separated from the GUI bits.
dodicat wrote:So between the two languages, the freebasic forum is much more helpful than the freepascal [lazarus] forum regarding the actual compilers.
Opinion, and IMHO false. The Lazarus forum is maybe slightly more business app oriented, with users having larger apps, but both forums have their weird and aggressive posters that can give first time posters the wrong impression.
dodicat wrote:Pascal has about the same degree of difficulty using the Win api as freebasic as far as I can tell anyway.
I do agree with that. There are accent and approach differences, but that depends on what you try to achieve and expect.
Pascal is easier with COM though, and many new APIs are COM. It is more VB like in that way.
dodicat wrote:But the winapi is not a popular topic in freepascal.
Non LCL, pure
winapi apps might not be common, but Winapi is used a lot, and since the VCL originally was a GDI wrapper, many canvas stuff is nearly the same with a VCL sauce over it, and additional pure winapi code can be used to enhance it (albeit that makes it windows-only)
It is weird getting blasted in this thread about not being winapi enough, when usually the LCL gets flak for being to windows api like. (also on non windows)
dodicat wrote:Also freebasic has a big advantage of having built in graphics, which can be a handy substitute for winapi for small applications.
Free Pascal comes with Graph since before Freebasic existed.
P.s. I really don't understand the small EXE cult as primary guiding beacon for tool selection, specially not in these magnitudes (say between 100k vs up to 1.5MB for small programs and 1MB to 15MB for large ones, Lazarus is 15-20MB, but over 2-3 million lines of code. What do any of these sizes matter on even a 15 year old 160GB HDD ?). There are bigger and more important problems in programming, not in the least the actual goal of the application.