Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!adm!mhg@mitre-bedford.arpa
From: mhg@mitre-bedford.arpa (Mark H. Granoff)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.pascal
Subject: Re: Single Character Input in VAX/VMS
Message-ID: <12568@brl-adm.ARPA>
Date: 22 Mar 88 16:35:21 GMT
Sender: news@brl-adm.ARPA
Lines: 42

>...
>2) The BASIC INKEY function is horridly slow (as is the rest of VAX-11 BASIC.
                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>   It is also a new function to BASIC 4.2 (I beleive).  Sites with an earlier
>   version do not have that luxury.
>...

*FLAME ON*

I feel compelled to take offense at this statement.  I do not think
that VAX BASIC can be lumped in and judged together with other BASIC
compilers for other machines.

One of the beauties of VAX/VMS is its ability to execute code
generated from any source langauge.  For all intents and purposes, all
source code (regardless of language) is compiled down to the same
machine code.  (For just about every compiler, you can specify
/MACHINE on the command line which generates a file containing the
MACRO-32 code for the higher level code).  VAX BASIC happens to be a
*very* versatile and robust language, as powerful as any other language
on a VAX.  While it can't do *everything* that every other language can
do (e.g. true linked lists), it is not "BASIC" in the *old* sense of
the language.

The fact that the INKEY function you refer to is "horridly slow" is
not the fault of the VAX or the VAX BASIC compiler, but of the source
code.  If you write bad/slow source code, you get bad/slow/(worse)
machine code.

It suffices to say that I am suitably pissed off at your arrogance.
Before you make a broad, sweeping statement like "VAX-11 BASIC is
horridly slow," check your facts.

*FLAME OFF*

Thank you.

Mark H. Granoff
Member of the Technical Staff
VMS Systems
The MITRE Corporation
mhg@mitre-bedford.ARPA