This is a version of the Oberon System 3 (also known as ETH Oberon), compatible with the Oberon+ compiler, IDE and runtimes and the OBX Platform Abstraction Layer (PAL), and thus truly cross-platform (runs on all platforms where LeanQt is available).
The migration is still work in progress, but sufficiently complete and stable to explore the platform. The latest commit is tested on both the Mono CLI and as a native executable built with the generated C code.
I have to admit that while I’m aware of the Oberon System, I know far too little about it to make any meaningful statements here.
White it’s interesting, Lazarus/Freepascal is more useful if you want to write actual programs.
> Lazarus/Freepascal is more useful if you want to write actual programs
Well, that’s like comparing Object Pascal with the Macintosh operating system. If at all, you could compare FreePascal with my Oberon+ programming language. (see https://oberon-lang.github.io/).. I spent significant effort in FreePascal and even implemented a parser and source code analyzer for it (see https://github.com/rochus-keller/FreePascal/), so I know the language pretty well. Oberon+ and FreePascal support different use-cases. While Lazarus/FreePascal in the first place tries to be a “Delphi for free” (which determines the language design space significantly), Oberon+ tries to be lean and sufficient for OO and modular programming (i.e. not a RAD environment). FreePascal is a very complex language (not even completely specified, and not actually less complex than C++) , and also suffers from legacy design issues which Wirth had solved in Modula and Oberon. So if you need a comfortable RAD environment and are not deterred by sheer size and complexity, then Lazarus/FreePascal is a good solution. If you instead need a lean system programming language, then Oberon+ is a good candidate.
> I know far too little about it to make any meaningful statements
I’m happy to answer questions.