Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Modula-3 FTW! (Score 2) 460

by Motard (#48901383) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Is Pascal Underrated?

Yes, there really is a good reason. To get the universe back into balance. Back in the day, people bought into their developments tools on the basis of cost and quality. Then companies like MS and Oracle followed the long established lead of the likes of IBM and charged managers through the nose for the 'most advanced technologies'. But the weren't really, and all of us techies knew it.

Turbo Pascal was a full participant in the PC revolution. It brought advanced capabilities - much more advanced than IBM or MS were offering at a hobbyist price. But it continued, until cheaper and better wasn't good enough. It had to be free.

There are some really great free products out there. But none of them are of a quality that can compete with the high end companies who are developing their programs for their paying customers rather than for themselves.

Companies like Borland found themselves in the middle of this. The ill-fated Kylix is the proof. Partially free didn't work. Now our choices are limited to Free or $10,000.

It sucks.

Comment: Re:Modula-3 FTW! (Score 3, Informative) 460

by Motard (#48901313) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Is Pascal Underrated?

Mmmm. PASCAL was designed by Wirth as an introduction-to-programming instructional language. It was supposed to teach the logic, methodology and 'best practices' of programming as they were defined then.

And it did.

Then it got adopted as a production language ... and God knows why ...

Oh, I don't know....maybe it represented the logic, methodology and best practices of programming

and went through a few iterations to iron out the bugs and add some features and utilities that a serious production/development language would require (including, most importantly, killing that one shot compiler).

And evolved into seriously great products like Turbo Pascal and Delphi.

As a result it has very few strengths compared to purpose designed languages/environments

It remains a great choice precisely because it isn't designed to a particular purpose, but is quite adaptable..

Comment: Re:Early fragmentation (Score 1) 460

by Motard (#48901209) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Is Pascal Underrated?

Turbo Pascal was quite successful into the IBM PC years. Iin fact I'm wondering if it even existed before the IBM PC)..

But I've use the UCSD-P system, Turbo Pascal and Delphi, and never had the problems you describe. Sure, some were more evolved than others, but I can't ever recall anything more than preferring a specific implementation.

Comment: Re:Turbo Pascal was the "dangliest danglies" (Score 1) 460

by Motard (#48901169) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Is Pascal Underrated?

Borland's Turbo Pascal was my introduction to serious programming with the Object Windows Library (OWL), before getting on to the multiple disk nightmare and wonder that was Turbo C++.

Pascal lasted exactly long enough to be completely destroyed by C++ at one end taking the object oriented approach, and Modula-2 being the "language of explanation" for CS.

Even that died the death when Visual Basic stomped everything in its path in the commercial arena, with Visual C/C++ taking everything elsewhere. Somewhere along the way Delphi shone very brightly for a few months....

Well, years anyway. There was actually a Microsoft program manager that was quoted as saying something like that Microsoft should thank God for Borland every day. As someone who used both VB and Delphi, I could see all of the things MS was lifting from Delphi. Until they finally lifted its architect.

The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected. -- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972

Working...