Re: Re: Opinion on Pascal
By: Sampsa to Vk3jed on Thu Nov 24 2016 04:54 pm
> I personally don't like Pascal, the only reason it became such a big deal
> back in the 80s/early 90s was that it's REALLY easy to write a compiler for
> it.
In my programming courses I was using Java and C++, but I came along well after
Pascal stopped being used in most colleges. I think it was still being taught
in some places at the time,but it was being phased out. We never got around to
building compilers (what the hell, I went to a community college).
But anyway, I'd always assumed it was because Pascal syntax was somewhat close
to pseudocode which made it more accessible to new students. Not sure how true
that was, but I thought I read it somewhere.
> Even Niklaus Wirt*h went on to produce two other languages that he
> considered the "real world" implementations of a Pascal-like language:
> Modula-2 and
> Oberon (Oberon is actually sort of nice to be honest but good luck doing
> anything with it).
>
I do remember reading about Modula and Oberon. If I'm remembering correctly
Wirth created these because Pascal was lacking a lot of features at the time
(specifically OO implementation), and these were written to kind of flesh out
Pascal. I know they didn't get far in terms of adoption, but I am curious how
many people might still be using them today.
I never did use it (I think I tried installing one of them at one point and
failed miserably) so can't really speak to the quality of the languages. Are
they usable today? Did adding objects to Pascal make them obsolete, or did
their differences go beyond that?
Also wasn't Oberon more than a language and also something of an operating
environment (sort of like a built in IDE)?
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ telnet://vert.synchro.net
|
