Waldek Hebisch wrote:
>
.... snip ...
>
> One case (math, not CS but still should give you some idea). We
> used Turbo Pascal in introductory programming course (compulsory
> for all math students). However, around 1994 we had some 32-bit
> machines with 1-4 Mb of RAM. On such machine it felt really
> clumsy to live with 16-bit limitations imposed by DOS and Turbo
> Pascal. So we investigated possible upgrade paths. One
> possibility considered was Delphi. But the message about Delhi
> was somwhat unclear for us -- we did not know how compatible it
> was with real Pascal (now we know it is compatible enough). The
> only sure thing about Delphi we knew was that Delphi requires
> Windows, and that was big minus. Also, in-compatibility of various
> Pascals was a problem -- we wanted to use Linux, but have source
> code ****tablity to Windows.
I think this points out the long-term self-immolating action of
Borland in failing to implement the requirements of the Standard.
At the same time the C compilers generally did meet the extant
standard. With the marked penetration Borland had I consider they
would still be a viable, if not dominant, force today if they had
met standards, and thus been able to ****t to other environments.
--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/tem****ary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
