If I am using Lazzarus why the heck I should mix up with Basic when all my logic works as same fast as written in C with Pascal? That I am not getting. But may be you can help me with that?
I wouldn’t mix and match either but I would point out PureBasic is as fast as C because C is what you get… it’s a transpiler.
1 Like
That’s okay. How they are handling the memory management and garbage collection? Is it a counter modell like Xojo is using it? Cause then it will become on many edges also slow when handling big objects in memory.
As it is a procedural language I am asking my self why using it for modern projects at all. Cause object oriented languages are saving much programming time while data handling is much more efficient? Or is it more for small applications? I have nmo Idea and I can’t find the right arguments for using it.
They don’t, it’s down to you to tidy up after yourself.
Because OOP is embarassing?
1 Like
No because procedural programming is not the right way to act with real complex scenarios. That’s while objectoriented languages winning all over. Not while it is more simple but while it brings out more performance and better functionality. But I know that you may regret this. What ever. It is in the meantime industrial standard. The most used languages all over the industry are object oriented. C++, C#, Ada, Ruby, Java and much, much more. I believe that there is no real future for the old procedural languages. You may have the chance to do programmings with it. But you’ll not find them in the industrie for new projects anymore. That’s the way of life. And for me: I would not want to use procedural languages in today’s time. It’s an old concept. There is no modern way.
Beside that I believe also that there will not come a top 10 language as procedural language in short times. Looking on Tiobe I am right. And yes, there are still languages like Fortran listed. But not for new projects. That are dinosaurs which are still used while the old projects still running with it.
I believe also that the time for basic syntax languages is ending. Microsoft got it first when they switched off the light for Visual Basic. All other basic dialects except PureBasic and Xojo are dead. There is not so much of it like it was before twenty years. But that’s another story.
I disagree.. OOP is not “embarassing” what is embarassing however, is people that use the wrong tools to do a job. Some tasks should be done in a procedurel style, and over-engrineering them just to be OOP should not be done, but most modern complex applications benefit greatly from OOP making any language that is procedural only, less effective overall.
This is MY OPINION, you are free to hold your own
True…
“I don’t predict the demise of object-oriented programming, by the way. Though I don’t think it has much to offer good programmers, except in certain specialized domains, it is irresistible to large organizations. Object-oriented programming offers a sustainable way to write spaghetti code. It lets you accrete programs as a series of patches. Large organizations always tend to develop software this way, and I expect this to be as true in a hundred years as it is today.”
Here’s another quote just for you 
“If Java had true garbage collection, most programs would delete themselves upon execution.”
- Robert Sewell
1 Like
WHAT? it is the exact opposite of that…
1 Like
Sewell was writing many stupid things, this is one of them. Java has a true garbage Colloction and you can evben choose how it shall collect. But that is not from interest. You argument fails.
Paul Graham is right: Spaghetti Code can be written OOP and procedural. There is no difference between them. Looking on the Code I have to work on sometimes which is written procedural shows me: it is more than possible, it is often the case. That shows also: when and if the programmers are not working in good practice they will fail to get good code as a result. Always and not depending on the paradigm of the language. I saw bad software in any language I ever touched. Starting from C over Pascal, C++, C#, Java…this line will never end.
But it is still no, really no argument to write complex software structures procedural. It makes everything harder especially complex data structures.
Perhaps it’s OOP that’s the old concept. It’s interesting that many modern languages - Zig, Rust, Go, Nim, … are not OOP.
1 Like
Yes, let’s see what RUST is mostly used for and get the goal.
GOLang is good but for real complex and big web projects people using: ahaaa yes, JAVA.
ZIG is uninteresting and not widely used. And the rest: forget it.
You may believing that this is the midpoint of the world but: it is not. Looking what’s used the most you’ll find: OOP Langs. Statemend ends.
Packages, modules and namespaces along with UDTs work well with complex datatypes. I think the concept of encapsulating everything inside classes is stupidy.
You aghainst all of the industry. Smart. But no, It’s not working good enough. I don’t have to fight with you while thisd is obsolete. There is no future for extremly complex structures with not oop languages. And if you where speaking truths you would not regret it. But hey, if for your projects it is good enough: go for it. No problem. I have too any people seen loosing the contral this way to agree to it.
And by the way: it is no problem to come to the target. It is always the question how performant at the end and how long you needed.
Obviously not to Jarred Sumner as he used it to create the rather splendid JS runtime Bun
And web APIs invariably exchange data using JSON which is… [drum roll] a serialized structure.
which is NOT the deinition of OOP… but hey thats ok
What you think you’re getting in OOP isn’t usually what you either want or need.
Julia’s multiple dispatch is surprisingly effective in delivering what we generally want, in practice.
As noted, pretty much every “new” language is not OOP, or not OOP by design (may be multi-paradigm).
I got halfway through the composition video before screaming.
Theres no reason you shouldn’t and couldn’t combine several methods to get things done. There’s no reason for the copy paste cons of code at the end either.
I legit don’t know what this guy is doing, not because I don’t understand it but theres a lot of places where you can have your cake and eat it too.
There is nothing wrong with using procedural or OOP. Both are capable of solving the same problems. A good programmer will good code in either one, just as a bad programmer will write bad code with either one.
Way back when, I had to go from procedural to OOP which required some rewiring in my brain. When I starting using Purebasic as my preferred language a few years ago, I had to rewire my brain back again to do procedural programming. 
There is no right or wrong… use what works best for you and the problem(s) you are trying to solve.
1 Like
OMG, and then having to go to javascript where everything is happening at the same time all at once, then back to php or something else for another project, etc. 
1 Like
There are definitely different perspectives on this; Casey Muratori has a bunch of good takes. This one might be more balanced for you.