TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
X-To:
Michael Feldman <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 19 Feb 2001 21:32:51 +0100
Reply-To:
Subject:
From:
Jerry van Dijk <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version:
1.0
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
 > As Steve implies, neither Level 1 nor Level 0
 > described a language that was useful for more than small programs.
 > Pascal was designed for teaching purposes, not to be industrially
 > useful, and the ISO standard was, in that sense, a joke because
 > any Pascal usefulness came from proprietary extensions anyway.

That is correct in the sense that ISO 7185 standardised Wirths original
language (aka 'classic Pascal');

 > There was some discussion of an extended Pascal standard, but I
 > don't think this ever came to fruition.

Yes it did. It's the ISO 10206 standard (aka 'extended pascal'). Which
includes seperately compilable modules (with initinializing, renamings, etc),
strings, real file handling, system library, external interfacing, and lots
more. There is a commercial validation suite and procedure and there are
a number of validated commercial (and free, like FreePascal) compilers
available for the popular platforms.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2