Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!mips!sjsca4!poffen From: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russell Poffenberger) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc Subject: Re: Turbo Pascal vs. C Message-ID: <1990Sep21.220031.19274@sj.ate.slb.com> Date: 21 Sep 90 22:00:31 GMT References: <1990Sep20.164153.28641@portia.Stanford.EDU> Reply-To: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russell Poffenberger) Distribution: comp Organization: Schlumberger Technologies, San Jose, CA. Lines: 62 In article <1990Sep20.164153.28641@portia.Stanford.EDU> dma@nova.stanford.edu (Domingo A. Mihovilovic) writes: >Yes!, Turbo Pascal is the best system to develop programs today. It has >all extensions and capabilities you will need ( from the lowest level to >objects ). But pascal was never intended to be a "useful" language. It was developed as an aid in teaching structured programming. C is much more accepted as an industry standard for software programming than pascal. >It is a very optimized and very fast compiler. I got recently Turbo C++. >Even though it is very fast among the C compilers it is more than 20 >times slower than Turbo Pascal. > > Another good point of TP is that it has an integrated environment with >which you can get work done very quickly (turbo C has also a very good >environment). Some other compilers claim to have integrated environments >but they are useless. >As an example in the PWB (Programmer's Workbench) of Microsoft C 6.0. To do > > - run the PWB and load the program. > - compile the program. > - execute the program from the PWB. > - return to PWB. > >takes 3 minutes with the simplest program you can write > >#include > >main() >{ >printf("hello World!\n") ; >} > >What kind of integrated environment is this ?? > >Just to compile the program takes 60 seconds !!! I agree that MSC is quite slow, however it is thorough. Also TC++ will not do Windows. (Not yet) > >In Turbo Pascal it takes 2 seconds to compile a more than 1400 line >program ( BGIDEMO.PAS, a graphics demo that comes with the system). > >All times were measured in a 386sx machine and DOS 3.3 > > > > The only reason to use something different would be portability to some >other platform, but is you are interested only in the IBM PC TPascal 5.5 >is the best choice. If you want to be more portable, and inline with industry standards, use C. If you want to ride the wave of the future (Object Oriented Programming) use C++. Turbo C++ is quite good and is also fully compatible with straight C. Russ Poffenberger DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies UUCP: {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276 San Jose, Ca. 95110 (408)437-5254