Pascal vs. C

[g-frank at gumby.UUCP]

> In article <25 at seismo.UUCP> keith at seismo.UUCP (Keith Bostic) writes:
> > Come on -- let's not start a PASCAL vs. C debate, okay?
> Quite. But then why say more?
> 
> > Pascal in its standard form is simply not useable for anything except cute
> > little application programs.
> I'm not the world's greatest Pascal fan, but this is just not true! I've
> seen many large useful programs written in standard Pascal, and written well.
> 
> Steven Pemberton, CWI, Amsterdam.

This discussion is a little stacked.  No one really thinks that ISO Pascal
IS good for anything except cute little application programs.  That's why
everyone and his sister and brother and major professor is out selling some
souped-up variant of the language.  This makes it almost impossible to 
discuss "Pascal" vs. anything.

The better comparison is Modula-2 vs. C.  The language attempts to address
the same kinds of goals (i.e., systems programming, operating systems)
while preserving strong typing and adding other advanced concepts (modularity,
monitors, coroutines, etc.).  It is also a standard, so discussions don't
have to center on whose implementation does that thing you just said the
language didn't do.

Modula-2 is a much better answer to the old, "but strongly typed languages
are so INFLEXIBLE" chestnut.


-- 
      Dan Frank

	"good news is just life's way of keeping you off balance."