Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Ben Bacarisse Newsgroups: comp.programming Subject: Re: Is Pascal utterly useless? Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2019 16:15:56 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 18 Message-ID: <87pnkg149f.fsf@bsb.me.uk> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="d3229d23fea7b14e8966b12eca21cd35"; logging-data="5337"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX183iMThrRGCQLueu80lsEGkOGCZeG72a2Q=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:sjgs3MHuSTEICuSZfzCKF0eeldA= sha1:a4icSisPKJk89Rv8GtIsruF/Dfs= X-BSB-Auth: 1.ee8223bfc4f248d08b40.20190904161556BST.87pnkg149f.fsf@bsb.me.uk Xref: csiph.com comp.programming:10176 Peter Percival writes: > Peter Percival wrote: >> Does ISO 7185 Pascal require program source to be just one file?  And >> if it does, doesn't that make it an utterly useless language? > > Another thing I don't like about Pascal is its dishonesty. One cannot > write in Pascal a function like Pascal's write. How dare the language > designer help himself to facilities that he denies users? I feel you pain, but you sound more exercised by this than it really merits! There's an excellent book (old now) that compares languages by examining the extent to which they could implement their own IO facilities. It's a very revealing point of view. Sadly I can't remember anything else about it. -- Ben.