Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!clyde!burl!codas!ge-dab!ge-rtp!edison!toylnd!dca
From: dca@toylnd.UUCP (David C. Albrecht)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: ctex documentation
Message-ID: <170@toylnd.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 7-Sep-87 17:18:42 EDT
Article-I.D.: toylnd.170
Posted: Mon Sep  7 17:18:42 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Sep-87 06:43:11 EDT
References: <1742@cp1.BELL-ATL.COM> <540@rocky.STANFORD.EDU> <4313@ncoast.UUCP> <1109@vu-vlsi.UUCP>
Organization: Dave & Anne in Charlottesville, VA
Lines: 23
Summary: Sans Pascal

> While it is true that TeX written in pascal is very difficult to work on
> if you only have a C compiler, isn't the reason TeX was originally written
> in pascal was because everyone and their Aunt Sophie knows enough pascal
> and probably has access (somehow) to a pascal compiler.  I think that if
> this is indeed the case, why do people make it difficult for themselves,
> and some others, by rewriting it in C?
> 
> --just a thought.

If they really wanted to write it in a language that virtually everyone
has access to it should have been BASIC :-). Gack, yuck, excuse me while
I wash my mouth out with soap.  Mfffph, mrphg.  Okay, there are plenty
of machines out there that don't have a Pascal compiler.  I have an
AT&T 3b1 running SYS V (no pascal and I'm sure it would cost a
bloody fortune).  I have an Amiga (didn't buy a Pascal).  Many people would
rather keep there software all in one language if at all possible.  As
most Unix software is in C, most of the stuff from the net for my Amiga
is in C, it only makes sense that I would like my documentation tools to
be in C as well.  I've got nothing against Pascal, From a readability
standpoint I really like the language,
I've just bowed to the inevitability of life on Usenet.

David Albrecht