On 1/10/2013 7:13 PM, Shane Ginnane wrote:
On Tue, 1 Oct 2013 13:21:15 +0800, David Crayford wrote:
I programmed in PL/I
professionally and IMO Pascal is a far cleaner language with more
expressive features. Pascals successors, such as Module/2 and Delphi,
widen the gap even more.
I would never profess to have "programmed" in PL/I - I was taught it by a
one-time employer. Did the job for a high level language in the 80's - but I was an
assembler sysprog.
Now Delphi - that was something else again when I was looking to do some
Windoze coding some years later. Man, that IDE was awesome, even for a
non-Pascal guy.
Borland exes should have been shot for what they did to that business. There
was a huge user conference in Anaheim in 1996 when I passed through in 1996.
And they (Borland) tossed it all away.
I actually liked PL/I a lot. I much preferred it to COBOL. I remember
reading that Fred Brooks regrets that it wasn't the systems programming
language for OS/360. I suppose because it was a big, complex language
for the time it didn't quite make the cut.
I took computer studies at high school and we were taught Turbo Pascal
and assembler on the BBC micro. The BBC was a great machine and most
British kids
of my age cut their teeth on them! The Acorn/BBC legacy lives on today
in ARM. The Sinclair's were just as much fun, typically eccentric
British designs. I broke the keyboard thrashing the keys playing Daley
Thompsons decathlon. Apples were out of our price range.
I agree wrt Delphi. It totally nuked VB for simplicity and was
considerably faster. I've still got a copy somewhere.
Shane ...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
