Scott Moore wrote:
> 2metre wrote:
>
>> CBFalconer wrote:
>>> Neither Delphi nor FPC are Pascal (always capitalized) compilers,
>>> ... they do not comply with the Pascal standards, neither ISO
>>> 7185 nor ISO 10206.
>> Ouch! I do dislike such prejudiced views being presented as fact!
>> Pascal existed before the standards were created. Therefore it cannot
>> be said that *only* standards-compatible Pascal is Pascal. Does all
>> 'Wirthian' Pascal code compile under Standards Pascal and vice-versa?
>
> Yes, very true. However, Delphi does not match Wirth's original
language,
> either. There was indeed a standard before the standard, and it was
> pretty good. Wirth did an outstanding job of the first re****t on
> the revised language in 1972, which by the way you can find a full copy
> of on the ansi-iso web site:
_My_ use of the term 'standard' is only in reference to the ISO
standards mentioned by CBF. I certainly realise that Delphi does not
meet Wirth's specification: I was only making that point that the ISO
standard Pascal(s) are NOT the only variants of the language that
deserve the name 'Pascal'.
> Does all 1972 standard code run on ISO 7185 ? First of all, there
> was never any 1972 standard code. We have plenty of examples from
> those days, and I have yet to see a really standard (as in original
> 1972 Wirth) program. Most of the ETH programs have CDC 6000 compiler
> dependencies in them.
....yet is it correct to refer to those variants of the language as
Pascal.
>
> For the second part, the ISO changed the way that procedure parameters,
> ....[snip]....
> I can and have run from compiler to compiler with zero changes.
>
> ....[snip]....
>> Are there *any* Pascal compilers that can easily be used to compile
>> standards-only Pascal code to produce applications that take full
>> advantage of today's GUI systems?
>
>
> Glad you asked. The answer is YES ! IP Pascal is full graphical,
windowing,
> with sound, ****table across platforms, and is probally the only platform
> in the world that can take a ISO 7185 standard program, as is, and run
> it in a Window. There is a demo version available for Windows at:
>
> http://www.moorecad.com/ippas
I will have a closer look some time. Does it have Object Pascal
extensions?
> I guess that would be me. I am a Pascal customer, I have been a user of
> ....[snip]....
> are other choices, my web site has a list.
>
> If I am annoying being promoter, profiter, and avocate for standard
> Pascal, perhaps thats what it needed.
Actually I do agree that that is what is needed. But it is a tad
unfortunate
that the majority use of this newgroup appears to be an advert for you
and your services!
Perhaps this is not a good newsgroup for me: I learnt Pascal from
Turbo/Borland Pascal through to Delphi. I've had exposure to VAX Pascal
because I've done conversions of NATO wargames from VAX Pascal to
Borland (someone at a certain UK defence establishment wanted a PC
version...) To me the language is merely a tool to achieve a certain
aim. I don't really care which variant I use as long as it can do the
job. Currently I'm only using FPC, which apart from the size of the
executables, is absolutely excellent!
Thanks for the reply - very good humoured considering the small elements
of criticism in my earlier post!
|
