On 7/12/2022 7:21 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 9:25 PM Ralf Quint wrote:
And that version, just when the switch to Go32 was being made, should be
a good starting point for a 16bit compiler, generating 16bit Borland
Pascal compatible code. Not sure if there is enough info stil
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 9:25 PM Ralf Quint wrote:
>
> And that version, just when the switch to Go32 was being made, should be
> a good starting point for a 16bit compiler, generating 16bit Borland
> Pascal compatible code. Not sure if there is enough info still around to
> make it even TPU c
On 7/11/2022 5:33 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
Which makes me wonder if it would be
possible to do such a "back port" from the sources of one of the earlier
versions of FPK,at least those that started to be self-compiling, before
the more widespread adaptations of Delphi'isms :?
I highly doubt it. F
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 1:04 PM Ralf Quint wrote:
>
> GNU's GPC was just a crutch, a unwanted step-child, that didn't even get
> a fraction of the attention that it should have gotten early on.
GPC was written in C ... unlike FPC. This was way before GCC 4.8
(2013), when everything switched
On 7/11/2022 5:02 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
There are at least half a dozen generations. Given the ones that have
been adopted outside Wirth's institutions and used in many countries,
there are things that we could call Pascal, Pascal 3 (Modula-2),
Pascal 4 (Oberon), and several different successor
On 7/11/2022 8:59 AM, Rugxulo wrote:
Hi,
They all have different purposes and implementations. I'm not
complaining (much). But Wirth himself doesn't use anything except
Oberon-07 anymore.
I read somewhere once that Wirth said that oberon was what pascal was intended
to be.
I can't remember
Hello Liam Proven,
[re Pascal, Modula, etc.]
You [Rugxulo] also said: >> (So it was too many competing languages,
honestly.)> Also not really
fair.> I mean, arguably, yes, but there are also dozens of variants of
C.> There's original C, K&R C, Plan 9 C, ANSI C, C 99, C11, C17 and soon
C23.> A
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 7:04 AM Liam Proven wrote:
>
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 at 21:35, Rugxulo wrote:
> >
> > Everybody and their brother made Pascal derivatives: Ada, Modula-2,
> > Modula-3, etc. While Dr. Wirth was not directly involved, there was
> > also a newer "Extended" Pascal standard i
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 at 21:35, Rugxulo wrote:
>
> Everybody and their brother made Pascal derivatives: Ada, Modula-2,
> Modula-3, etc. While Dr. Wirth was not directly involved, there was
> also a newer "Extended" Pascal standard in 1988 (ISO 10206) that also
> had modules. But even Wirth kept going
On 7/11/2022 2:49 AM, Rugxulo wrote:
Hi,
GNU Pascal's main claim to fame (besides "Borland Pascal 7" support)
was also supporting both ISO standards (7185, 10206). There are DJGPP
builds available. But GNU Pascal hasn't been maintained in many years.
Still, it works!
I made a stab at getting GPC
On 7/10/2022 11:49 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 7:44 PM Ralf Quint wrote:
On 7/8/2022 4:26 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
Turbo Pascal debuted in 1983 with support for CP/M and DOS via .COM
files (max. 64k size). When they dropped CP/M and .COM support in TP 4
(1987), then they were able
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 7:44 PM Ralf Quint wrote:
>
> On 7/8/2022 4:26 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
> >
> > Turbo Pascal debuted in 1983 with support for CP/M and DOS via .COM
> > files (max. 64k size). When they dropped CP/M and .COM support in TP 4
> > (1987), then they were able to use separate "unit
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 6:30 PM Ralf Quint wrote:
>
> With C(++), it's more like "let's throw everything in one big pot and
> then lets see what we actually need in our program". A huge advantage of
> Turbo/Borland Pascal, Delphi and FreePascal is that they are all capable
> of "smart-linking"
On 7/8/2022 4:26 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
Turbo Pascal debuted in 1983 with support for CP/M and DOS via .COM
files (max. 64k size). When they dropped CP/M and .COM support in TP 4
(1987), then they were able to use separate "units" and DOS .EXEs for
larger code. (But TP 3 could still address 1 MB wit
On 7/8/2022 12:32 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
The original Pascal was stabilized and "sent off" to standardization
in 1977. They didn't add any major features, so it's almost the same
as de facto J&W. The standard (ISO 7185) was published in 1982.
"Classic" Pascal had no modularity, everything was a singl
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 11:37 AM Ralf Quint wrote:
>
> For Pascal, this is +95% wrong. The first widespread version of Pascal,
> UCSD Pascal, also sold for example under names like "Apple Pascal" (on
> Apple II/III) did introduce the concept of "units", which allowed not
> only for modular dev
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 11:37 AM Ralf Quint wrote:
>
> For Pascal, this is +95% wrong. The first widespread version of Pascal,
> UCSD Pascal, also sold for example under names like "Apple Pascal" (on
> Apple II/III) did introduce the concept of "units", which allowed not
> only for modular dev
On 7/7/2022 8:54 PM, dmccunney wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 8:30 PM Daniel wrote:
I am unfamiliar woththe C languages, but does it also allow one to mix both
assembly in with the C source code? Are there any other languages that allows
mixing of assembly in with the language code?
Not in
Hello Daniel,
I am unfamiliar woththe C languages, but does it also allow one to mix
both assembly in with the C source code? Are there any other languages
In short, yes, most C compilers allow you to write "in-line" assembly
inside a C language source file.
However, note that this is not a
On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 8:30 PM Daniel wrote:
>
> I am unfamiliar woththe C languages, but does it also allow one to mix both
> assembly in with the C source code? Are there any other languages that
> allows mixing of assembly in with the language code?
Not in the manner you are thinking of.
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 7:29 PM Daniel wrote:
>
> A little info for those who uses FreeBasic (or even Power Basic 3.5) in
> FreeDOS. In case noone knows this, it is possible to mix both Basic and
> Assembly language in the same source code using both PB and FB using the
> ‘ASM’ command. T
A little info for those who uses FreeBasic (or even Power Basic 3.5) in
FreeDOS. In case noone knows this, it is possible to mix both Basic and
Assembly language in the same source code using both PB and FB using the
‘ASM’ command. This is something I have been doing in PowerBasic for some
time.
22 matches
Mail list logo
