The purpose of GNU Pascal_(re)

24 Jul 96 04:00:06 EDT

> By the way: Where are those many different Extended Pascal compilers?

You have Prospero's compilers for Dos/Windows and OS/2, DEC has a Pascal
compiler on  VAX which implements almost all of the Extended Pascal standard.
I'm not sure of the Macintosh, there is a Pascal compiler on the Mac from
Warriar, but if that one implements Extended Pascal?? I'm going to research that
today.

> You don't lose portability by simply including bit-shift operators, objects,
etc. into 
> the Extended Pascal standard.  But they didn't include them.  No idea, why.

Objects are in another standard. bit-shift operators have to depend upon memory
layout and byte ordering. But I agree with you that they should be available.

> And what about, say, user-defined operators which are almost a *must* for
scientific calculations?

I completely agree with you that user-defined operators are a must in a field
where those operators defined. In most other areas they are not. We can probably
atttach a dozen explanations to the following construct:

  House := PersonA + PersonB;

The example you gave had exactly one meaning clear to everyone.


> But I don't intend to spend my time with trying to satisfy standard
specifications I don't realize their
> sense.

I can quite agree with you. But don't forget: there are millions, literally
millions of code written in some form of Standard Pascal out there in the world.
For such people an alternative in the form of GNU Pascal could really be
interesting.


> How would you define "real Pascal spirit"?

Let the compiler do as much as possible for you: basically that comes down to no
untyped pointers. I *have* to use much more untyped pointers in Borland Pascal
(in obtaining addresses from procedures, strings, etc.) than would be necessary.


> Extended Pascal may be good, but GPC will be even better.  It is time to set
up the next standard!

Completely agreed. I can accept the modifications to GPC.GUIDE you presented. Of
course a compiler which accepts Borland Pascal syntax is a major advantage.
Makes porting much easier. And if you really have good alternatives for
Borland's standard libraries...


Groetjes,

Berend.

Berend de Boer (100120.3121@CompuServe.COM)