-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 12/12/06 18:06, Mike McCarty wrote: > Ron Johnson wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> On 12/12/06 16:30, Mike McCarty wrote: >> >>> Ron Johnson wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> My recollection of the 1980s MS-DOS world was that Turbo Pascal's >>>> problems were it's small memory model and lack of modules until >>>> v4.0, by which time C had already taken over. >>> >>> Who said anything about MSDOS? C took over when CP/M was the rage. >>> "Modules" are just what I mentioned with respect to "separate >>> compilation". >>> >>> The issue with Pascal is that it is completely unsuited to >>> systems programming altogether, because it has no escape >>> route from the strong typing, no provision for separate >>> compilation, and uses interpreted p-code. >> >> >> I'm not a systems programmer, I'm a DP programmer. Thus, I don't >> give a Rat's Arse whether my language of choice is good for system > > I wouldn't give you a rats ass for your opinion :-) > > Just kidding.
:) >> programming. In fact, I *like* B&D languages. Why? Not needing to >> worry about pointers and heaps and array under/overflows trampling >> over core means that my jobs die less often, which is A Good Thing. > > It certainly is. I'm not trashing Pascal. I liked Pascal. And, if > you read what I wrote earlier, I commented that it is, for all > who have eyes to see, a superior language /as a language/ to C. > It is unsuitable for systems programming for various reasons. You seem so focused on systems programming, as if the ability to do systems programming is an important measure of a language. Very puzzling. > It is unsuitable for any large program because it does not have > separate compilation, which is a necessity when a program gets > over about 1000 LLOC or so. That's *highly* implementation-specific. For example, VAX Pascal had separate compilation and could link with object modules from other languages back in the early/mid-1980s. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Is "common sense" really valid? For example, it is "common sense" to white-power racists that whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins are mud people. However, that "common sense" is obviously wrong. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFf3GLS9HxQb37XmcRAt8tAKDIFtam9Qjr4+CGyaPEhcg7gU88PwCgziwK 5r27RS72Sv+/bVlYQjzGoMc= =9CIg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
