Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lanl.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!cmcl2!lanl!jlg
From: jlg@lanl.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.lang
Subject: Re: Pascal typing
Message-ID: <20748@lanl.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 31-Jan-85 16:59:52 EST
Article-I.D.: lanl.20748
Posted: Thu Jan 31 16:59:52 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 5-Feb-85 17:57:17 EST
References: <2340@hplabsc.UUCP> <4948@utzoo.UUCP>
Sender: newsreader@lanl.ARPA
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 28

> So it is with Pascal: it has now been standardised, with the blessing of
> Wirth. It replaces Jensen and Wirth version.
>
> ISO stands for International Standards Organisation. It is supported by most
> major governments, including, unless I'm very wrong, the USA. If you want
> code for any language to be portable, you use the standard. ISO Pascal is
> such a standard. J&W Pascal is dead.


Once again!  If any of the software vendors used the ISO standard (I know
of only one that does) I would agree with all of the above.  It doesn't
matter what the acranym stands for or how many governments rubber stamped
it - it only matters what is available in the marketplace.  J&W Pascal
is the ONLY Pascal that is even remotely portable (and someone pointed
out that there are implementations of 'Pascal' that don't even meet J&W
standards).

Everyone agrees that the new Fortran standard is what is meant by Fortran
because all the vendors use it.  It is almost impossible to find a vendor
of a Fortran compiler who doesn't at least CLAIM to be compatible with
ANSI X3.0-1978 (or at least the subset).  If the same were true of ISO
Pascal we could all agree that it was now the REAL Pascal.

J. Giles

P.S.  I have been informed that there IS an ANSI standard for Pascal.
      Since no one follows it either, this puts an end to my speculation
      that ANSI might be a more widely influential body.