Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cmcl2!lanl!opus!afoiani From: afoiani@dante.nmsu.EDU (Anthony Foiani) Newsgroups: comp.lang.pascal Subject: "standard" pascal Message-ID: Date: 30 Jun 89 05:36:10 GMT Sender: news@nmsu.edu Distribution: comp Organization: New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM Lines: 34 I was thinking about the Turbo Pascal vs. ANSI Pascal controversy, and this is what I came up with: If you are instructing people in pascal, why are you teaching them the language? So they can create useful, efficient programs, usually. Secondly, what truely defines the standard? The anSi (quote) standard (endquote) or the *industry* standard? It seems more logical to me to teach the industry standard. Look at the C language; ansi defined a standard in 1986 (?) and our site still doesn't have a system that supports it (gcc does, I believe, but that is about it.) If there were a streamlined, adequate-interface, efficient ANSI pascal compiler available, that produced fast, tight code.... it would be acceptable. But, before demanding on "standard" pascal, look at what turbo *does* have: graphics (which you would need to write and interface) integrated environment (lotsa luck with generic software...) fast compile/execute, with no need to muck w/ LINK etc. small overhead (v5.0 is only 160k... v3.1, which is suitable for education purposes, is only about 40k) easy commands (v5 has menus, v3 command keys...) industry base. (I am relatively sure that Turbo has more purchasers than MS Pascal, IBM Pascal, etc...) These are, of course just thoughts. It is not ment as a flame (as such). Just take a look at the "real" (grin) world before saying "If it's not the standard, I'm not using it" Dementedly yours, -- tony foiani (afoiani@nmsu.edu) "And remember...don't lose your (mcsajf@nmsuvm1.bitnet) head..." -The Kurgan, HIGHLANDER