[fpc-pascal] The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[ik]

Hi,

I have read in the Linux Kernel malling list some emails, and I found
some points made by Linus Torvalds about Pasca;

http://idkn.wordpress.com/2008/04/15/the-reason-why-linus-torvalds-hate-pascal/

Ido
-- 
http://ik.homelinux.org/
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[Florian Klaempfl]

Who is Linus Torvalds?
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[Joost van der Sluis]

Op dinsdag 15-04-2008 om 10:18 uur [tijdzone +0300], schreef ik:
> Hi,
> 
> I have read in the Linux Kernel malling list some emails, and I found
> some points made by Linus Torvalds about Pasca;
> 
> http://idkn.wordpress.com/2008/04/15/the-reason-why-linus-torvalds-hate-pascal/
> 

Your statement in the blog-posting is not entirely true. What Linus does
in this thread is arguing why goto's could be meaningfull sometimes.
Apparently he thinks that the idea that goto's are evil in all cases
comes from Nikolaus Wirth. To prove that he (Wirth) was wrong, he points
at some weaknesses of the language that Wirth had developed. And that
was indeed this old pascal version. This language didn't had any goto's
but that didn't make it more readable. It would even be more readable if
it had support for goto. (That's Linus statement)

Linus also put (traditional) before pascal, just to make this clear. So
I don't see this as a 'rant on pascal', but just arguing with some
examples of older languages that goto's could be good in some cases.

Joost.



___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[Roberto Padovani]

Ahthe old goto arguinghow many beers have gone with it!
Linus is just right, since everyday the purists of the OO languages
still can't live without writing a GOTO; they just call it in another
"politically correct" way:

raise Exception.Create("TA-DA!")

R#


2008/4/15, Joost van der Sluis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Op dinsdag 15-04-2008 om 10:18 uur [tijdzone +0300], schreef ik:
>
> > Hi,
>  >
>  > I have read in the Linux Kernel malling list some emails, and I found
>  > some points made by Linus Torvalds about Pasca;
>  >
>  > 
> http://idkn.wordpress.com/2008/04/15/the-reason-why-linus-torvalds-hate-pascal/
>  >
>
>
> Your statement in the blog-posting is not entirely true. What Linus does
>  in this thread is arguing why goto's could be meaningfull sometimes.
>  Apparently he thinks that the idea that goto's are evil in all cases
>  comes from Nikolaus Wirth. To prove that he (Wirth) was wrong, he points
>  at some weaknesses of the language that Wirth had developed. And that
>  was indeed this old pascal version. This language didn't had any goto's
>  but that didn't make it more readable. It would even be more readable if
>  it had support for goto. (That's Linus statement)
>
>  Linus also put (traditional) before pascal, just to make this clear. So
>  I don't see this as a 'rant on pascal', but just arguing with some
>  examples of older languages that goto's could be good in some cases.
>
>
>  Joost.
>
>
>
>
>  ___
>  fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
>  http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
>
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[Marco van de Voort]

> Ahthe old goto arguinghow many beers have gone with it!
> Linus is just right, since everyday the purists of the OO languages
> still can't live without writing a GOTO; they just call it in another
> "politically correct" way:
> 
> raise Exception.Create("TA-DA!")

There is a fundamental difference. You don't know where exactly this will
end up (jump and destination are decoupled), and that destination can differ
depending on calling sequence.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

[fpc-pascal] Re: The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[Milan Marusinec]

Florian Klaempfl wrote:

Who is Linus Torvalds?
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Torvalds

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[Marco van de Voort]

> Op dinsdag 15-04-2008 om 10:18 uur [tijdzone +0300], schreef ik:
> > I have read in the Linux Kernel malling list some emails, and I found
> > some points made by Linus Torvalds about Pasca;
> > 
> > http://idkn.wordpress.com/2008/04/15/the-reason-why-linus-torvalds-hate-pascal/
> > 
> 
> Your statement in the blog-posting is not entirely true. What Linus does
> in this thread is arguing why goto's could be meaningfull sometimes.
> Apparently he thinks that the idea that goto's are evil in all cases
> comes from Nikolaus Wirth. To prove that he (Wirth) was wrong, he points
> at some weaknesses of the language that Wirth had developed. And that
> was indeed this old pascal version. This language didn't had any goto's
> but that didn't make it more readable. It would even be more readable if
> it had support for goto. (That's Linus statement)

(it had support, just only numerical labels. Modula2 didn't have goto's.
That came later (D2?), and same with break and continue)

> Linus also put (traditional) before pascal, just to make this clear. So
> I don't see this as a 'rant on pascal', but just arguing with some
> examples of older languages that goto's could be good in some cases.

I do see it as a rant if you raves on how it is used to torture students
etc. A point could have been made more sec.

However it shows again the image problem of pascal, cause by people making
assumptions on old compilers during their student years, and keep comparing
it to later ones forever.

If even reasonably intelligent people can't escape from it, maybe we are
doomed.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

[fpc-pascal] isWild bug?

[Luca Olivetti]

I'm not sure it is a bug or the intended behaviour, so I'm asking here:

IsWild('c','cc*',true) returns true
IsWild('ca','cc*',true) returns false

The first result seems incorrect to me, I think the original string 
should start with 'cc' to match 'cc*'.


Bye
--
Luca

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[Joost van der Sluis]

Op dinsdag 15-04-2008 om 10:21 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Marco van
de Voort:

> > Linus also put (traditional) before pascal, just to make this clear.
> So
> > I don't see this as a 'rant on pascal', but just arguing with some
> > examples of older languages that goto's could be good in some cases.
> 
> I do see it as a rant if you raves on how it is used to torture
> students
> etc. A point could have been made more sec.
> 
> However it shows again the image problem of pascal, cause by people
> making
> assumptions on old compilers during their student years, and keep
> comparing
> it to later ones forever.

That's also what Linus says:

"(Yeah, yeah, most _practical_ versions of Pascal ended up having all
the stuff necessary to break structure, but as you may be able to tell,
I was one of the unwashed masses who had to write in "standard Pascal"
in my youth. I'm scarred for life)."

> If even reasonably intelligent people can't escape from it, maybe we
> are doomed.

Those people are getting older and older, we just need a younger
audience. ;)

Joost.


___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[Milan Marusinec]

Joost van der Sluis wrote:

Op dinsdag 15-04-2008 om 10:19 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Milan
Marusinec:
  

Florian Klaempfl wrote:


Who is Linus Torvalds?
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Torvalds



You could consider Florian's remark as a joke. ;)

Joost.




  

Yeah, so did my reply was a joke ...

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[Vinzent Höfler]

Marco van de Voort wrote:

Ahthe old goto arguinghow many beers have gone with it!
Linus is just right, since everyday the purists of the OO languages
still can't live without writing a GOTO; they just call it in another
"politically correct" way:

raise Exception.Create("TA-DA!")


There is a fundamental difference. You don't know where exactly this will
end up (jump and destination are decoupled), and that destination can differ
depending on calling sequence.


Which, in some cases art least, makes "doing it the right way" even 
worse. :D



Vinzent.

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[Marco van de Voort]

> Marco van de Voort wrote:
> >> Ahthe old goto arguinghow many beers have gone with it!
> >> Linus is just right, since everyday the purists of the OO languages
> >> still can't live without writing a GOTO; they just call it in another
> >> "politically correct" way:
> >>
> >> raise Exception.Create("TA-DA!")
> > 
> > There is a fundamental difference. You don't know where exactly this will
> > end up (jump and destination are decoupled), and that destination can differ
> > depending on calling sequence.
> 
> Which, in some cases art least, makes "doing it the right way" even 
> worse. :D

Which is not surprised. Unless you are convinced that GOTO can't be abused
:-)
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[Florian Klaempfl]

Vinzent Höfler schrieb:



Marco van de Voort wrote:

Ahthe old goto arguinghow many beers have gone with it!
Linus is just right, since everyday the purists of the OO languages
still can't live without writing a GOTO; they just call it in another
"politically correct" way:

raise Exception.Create("TA-DA!")


There is a fundamental difference. You don't know where exactly this will
end up (jump and destination are decoupled), and that destination can 
differ

depending on calling sequence.


Which, in some cases art least, makes "doing it the right way" even 
worse. :D




Exceptions sometimes remind me of the COME FROM statement of INTERCAL:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INTERCAL
I think even Wirth called exceptions even worse than come from.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[Rodrigo Palhano]

The original text about this matter.

Go To Statement Considered Harmful
Edsger W. Dijkstra

http://www.u.arizona.edu/~rubinson/copyright_violations/Go_To_Considered_Harmful.html


On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 08:50:43 -0300, Florian Klaempfl  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Vinzent Höfler schrieb:

  Marco van de Voort wrote:

Ahthe old goto arguinghow many beers have gone with it!
Linus is just right, since everyday the purists of the OO languages
still can't live without writing a GOTO; they just call it in another
"politically correct" way:

raise Exception.Create("TA-DA!")


There is a fundamental difference. You don't know where exactly this  
will
end up (jump and destination are decoupled), and that destination can  
differ

depending on calling sequence.
 Which, in some cases art least, makes "doing it the right way" even  
worse. :D




Exceptions sometimes remind me of the COME FROM statement of INTERCAL:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INTERCAL
I think even Wirth called exceptions even worse than come from.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal





--
Rodrigo Palhano
-
Equipe SpeedCASE
http://www.speedcase.com.br
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] XMLRPC in FPC

[syraxes]

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 10:53:05AM -0500, Baeseman, Cliff wrote:
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/delphixml-rpc/
> 
> In the cvs you will find where they imported my original 2.0 version and 
> extended it with
> a new one. Not sure what exactly they did to the original but either should 
> get you
> what you need.

Thanks for the link Cliff !   I haven't compiled it yet 
(because i need to install Indy first) but looking at the
sample code suggests that delphixml-rpc is what I need.
Provided that i manage to install indy and compile the units
with freepascal on linux...


Cheers,
Adrian Maier
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

[fpc-pascal] Re: "assertion failed" testing merges into fixes branch

[Seth Grover]

>
>  What is the version of glibc on the machine that causes a problem?
>

$ /lib/libc.so.6
GNU C Library stable release version 2.6.1, by Roland McGrath et al.
Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.
There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Compiled by GNU CC version 4.2.1 (Ubuntu 4.2.1-5ubuntu4).
Compiled on a Linux >>2.6.15.7<< system on 2007-09-30.
Available extensions:
crypt add-on version 2.1 by Michael Glad and others
GNU Libidn by Simon Josefsson
Native POSIX Threads Library by Ulrich Drepper et al
BIND-8.2.3-T5B
For bug reporting instructions, please see:
.

Thanks,

-SG

-- 
Good news, everyone!

Seth Grover
sethdgrover[at]gmail[dot]com
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: "assertion failed" testing merges into fixes branch

[Jonas Maebe]

On 15 Apr 2008, at 15:43, Seth Grover wrote:


What is the version of glibc on the machine that causes a problem?



$ /lib/libc.so.6
GNU C Library stable release version 2.6.1, by Roland McGrath et al.


I've tested on systems with glibc 2.3.6, 2.5 and 2.7 and all work fine  
(I don't have access to systems with other glibc versions installed).  
I therefore think this was just a bug in 2.6.1 (possibly also 2.6), so  
unless someone analyses the cause of the problem with glibc 2.6.1, I'm  
not going to spend time on this.



Jonas
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re[2]: [fpc-pascal] The reason why linus torvalds hate-pascal

[Пётр Косаревский с mail . ru]

Hello, Joost,

On Tuesday, April 15, 2008, 12:48:46 PM you wrote:

JvdS> Those people are getting older and older, we just need a younger
JvdS> audience. ;)

It's sad you mentioned it.

I started using Pascal in University because of ACM-ICPC (while I
studied C++ in the school). I participated only once and my team got
the 7th place in my region, we didn't get to the next stage
(they selected 7 teams, but with a non-trivial algorithm; probably
none of us participated next years because of this), but
nowadays the most notable result for me is that I like Pascal.

This particular way is impassable for youth nowadays:
http://icpc.baylor.edu/systems/finals/ --- C/C++ and Java (both under
Eclipse of course, because it's IBM).

There was (Free)Pascal some time ago. It was dropped from 2006, if I
get it right (and in 2005 it had limited status).

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal