Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site whuxle.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!whuxle!jph
From: jph@whuxle.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc
Subject: Re: Request for info: Pascals under PC-D - (nf)
Message-ID: <182@whuxle.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 9-Dec-83 18:35:43 EST
Article-I.D.: whuxle.182
Posted: Fri Dec  9 18:35:43 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 11-Dec-83 01:42:06 EST
Sender: jph@whuxle.UUCP
Organization: Bell Labs, Whippany
Lines: 24

#R:sri-arpa:-1440200:whuxle:22700009:000:866
whuxle!jph    Dec  9 18:35:00 1983

I have used the IBM PASCAL (Microsoft) for development and
have found that to be very good. Some of the reasons are:

	- The text (code) can be as large as you want (not
	restricted to 64K) since all the calls between
	procedures are intersegment (4bytes).

	- The data space is restricted to a total of 64K,
	but PASCAL has pointers which are 20 bits so that
	you can access all of memory and therefore if you
	need it, you can create your own memory management
	functions for the memory that your program does not
	occupy, thereby using all the available memory of
	the system.

The compiler has been reliable and there appear to be other
extensions to the compiler for writing 'interrupt' routine
and other 'system' routines, but this is not documented. The
code that is generated (if you turn off the run-time checks
on values, array bounds, etc.) is very good.