Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!hplabs!pyramid!infmx!cortesi
From: cortesi@infmx.UUCP (David Cortesi)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Borland (was Calc programs)
Keywords: User Hostile
Message-ID: <2671@infmx.UUCP>
Date: 17 Nov 89 23:33:29 GMT
References: <12542856940.20.B.BSK@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU> <5636@umd5.umd.edu>
Reply-To: pyramid!infmx!cortesi (David Cortesi)
Organization: Informix, Menlo Park, Ca. U.S.A.
Lines: 11

In article <5636@umd5.umd.edu> jg108@umd5.umd.edu (Martin Walser) writes:
>>> [Somebody said]  Certainly Turbo Pascal is not [worthwhile].
>>  [Somebody else said]  What's wrong with Turbo Pascal?
>   [Then Martin Walser explained] IMHO ... It looks like 
>                Borland merely ported it straight from the PC...

Wherever Borland got it, they did NOT port if from the PC.  What they sell
as "Turbo Pascal Mac" has *many* and *serious* incompatibilities with
Turbo Pascal for the PC.  It is in no way the same compiler or based on
the same compiler.  It is a decent implementation of a nice, Wirth- or
ANSI-standard compiler (proof positive it isn't "Turbo" :-).