Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!udel!burdvax!dave
From: dave@PRC.Unisys.COM (David Lee Matuszek)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: $$$ & THINK Pascal 3.0
Message-ID: <13228@burdvax.PRC.Unisys.COM>
Date: 20 Mar 90 17:21:57 GMT
References: <12004@eagle.wesleyan.edu> <2277@husc6.harvard.edu>
Sender: news@PRC.Unisys.COM
Organization: Unisys Corporation, Paoli Research Center; Paoli, PA
Lines: 23


Rich, I believe you when you say the upgrade to THINK Pascal 3.0 is
well worth the $69.  I'm trying to figure out a way to justify
spending the money for it, myself.  (Since I don't really have the
time to develop salable products, this isn't easy.)

My concern is, rather, that I think there is still a place for "real"
Pascal, the language defined by Wirth, and there is still a place for
inexpensive implementations of that language.

"Pascal" 3.0 has, I presume, the necessary extensions to deal with an
object-oriented library.  But I'll bet a lot of people would still
just like to have Pascal, without paying the premium for the
non-Pascal object-oriented features.  It would have been nice to keep
Pascal 2.0, and name the new package something like "Pascal+", with a
clear upgrade path.  So far I've seen nothing to imply that 2.0 will
still be available--will it?

(Yes, I've used MacPascal.  I'll stick with 2.0.)
-- Dave Matuszek (dave@prc.unisys.com)
-- Unisys Corp. / Paoli Research Center / PO Box 517 / Paoli PA  19301
-- Any resemblance between my opinions and those of my employer is improbable.
  << "Next time, Jack, write a goddamned memo!"  >>