|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 17:44, Geoff Rivell wrote:
> On Wednesday 03 July 2002 10:36 pm, Noah Silva wrote:
>
> > Since I heard the groans around the room, I have to ask: Why?
> > It has been my experience that many techie types (or hardcore C or ASM)
> > ...
> > misconceptions floating around pascal (it's slow, it's not powerful,
> > it's interpreted...), and I have to wonder why?
>
> I use Free Pascal sometimes. It's leagues above the old TP/BP for dos.
> I'd say its no worse then a Perl/Python war. Anyone who has used
> Delphi/Kylix/Free Pascal knows Pascal has progressed well. I'd say its
> easier then C++, but with as many features.
I don't get all the perl/python/ruby/etc. Why do we need 25 different
scripting languages? Worse yet, I have to install them because
SOMETHING will use ruby, something else will use perl.. yet another
thing will want python.. some other script will want zsh, etc. There
are compilers for a reason ;)
> That being said, it does suck having to install an extra lib just to run
> Pascal apps :) (Not sure about Kylix).
I don't have to install any lib to run programs I have compiled with
FreePascal or Virtual Pascal. (You need a compiler to compile them
obviously). You have a choice, but normally the assumption is that the
libraries you use are local to pascal and so they get compiled (linked)
statically into your program.
If you make a GUI program with Kylix (Or Delphi in CLX mode), it needs
some QT libs because it uses QT for it's cross-platform GUI CLX
libraries.
You have to install far more than that to run most C compiled
programs... Look at how much GNUcash needs...
> > I'm not trying to start a flame war, but I am interested on opinions
> > about this. I have programmed in Pascal and C (and modula and rpn, 68k
> > asm, etc.) for many years, including designing some compilers in
> > college, and so far, pascal is still my favorite ;)
>
> Yeah. Speed of development is not matched with Pascal. It's just too easy.
>
I don't think ease is the most important factor, but the important part
is that it gives ease and safety -without- compromising speed. The
reason it was a teaching language was because it forces good program
design to some extent. What, we don't want production applications
designed well, only research ones? ;)
-- noah silva
______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug
|
|