Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!cbmvax!daveh
From: daveh@cbmvax.cbm.UUCP (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Re: PRECEDENT FOR USE OF =
Message-ID: <482@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 2-Jul-86 13:17:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: cbmvax.482
Posted: Wed Jul  2 13:17:49 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 3-Jul-86 07:03:31 EDT
References: <1856@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 26

> Quick Jab:
> 	If Pascal is so good why did its author (N. Wirth) write
> two other languages (Modula & Modula II) before deciding he had one
> which could be used for system implementation? (Lilith (sp?))
> 
> 				Bill Bogstad
> 				bogstad@hopkins-eecs-bravo.arpa

Never any question about this one.  Wirth designed Pascal as a teaching
language, not a system implementation language, and as a language that
could be easily compiled by a 1-pass compiler on small computers.  It
was designed specifically to be used by novices, thus the very strong
type-checking, bounds checking, etc., and the very limited power of
the language.  Modula 2 seems like and attempt to create a spin-off of
the Pascal methodology that can actually be used for system implementation
and the like.  Probably just as reasonable as all the incompatibly-expanded
Pascals around today.

-- 
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Dave Haynie    {caip,ihnp4,allegra,seismo}!cbmvax!daveh

   A quote usually goes here, but its currently being rennovated.

	These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they be yours too.
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/