Path: utzoo!dptcdc!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!bu-cs!buengc!art From: art@buengc.BU.EDU (A. R. Thompson) Newsgroups: comp.sys.encore Subject: Re: TeX Message-ID: <2573@buengc.BU.EDU> Date: 18 Apr 89 15:10:28 GMT References: <1101@bnlux0.bnl.gov> <2561@buengc.BU.EDU> <1102@bnlux0.bnl.gov> Reply-To: art@buengc.bu.edu (A. R. Thompson) Followup-To: comp.sys.encore Organization: Boston Univ. Col. of Eng. Lines: 89 In article <1102@bnlux0.bnl.gov> drs@bnlux0.UUCP (David R. Stampf) writes: >In article <2561@buengc.BU.EDU> art@buengc.bu.edu (A. R. Thompson) writes: >>In article <1101@bnlux0.bnl.gov> como@bnl-max (Andrew T. Como) writes: >>> >>> Is there anyone out there that has a version of TeX that >>>is running the the Encore Umax 4.2 (rev 3.2). >>> >>> I have a version written is Pascal but unfortunately >>>the Encore compiler is terribly deficient. >>> >>> Appreciate any help from you multimax administrators. >> >>It's not the Encore Pascal that's deficient, it's the Berkeley Pascal that >>is terribly deficient. Namely it passes file variables as value >>parameters which is a no no. The C versions of TeX work just fine. You >>should get them and everything should be peachy. If you have a problem >>please contact us and we will give you a hand. >> > > If I'm not mistaken, TeX compiles just fine on a VAX running BSD, and >it doesn't on a max. If that makes the BSD version deficient ... Yes, but the VAX BSD Pascal is the Berkeley pc compiler which allows the illegal use of file parameters mentioned above. This handling of these parameters is contrary to the standard as well as long standing restrictions on the assignment to file variables. Quoting "Pascal User Manual and Report" 3rd edition by Jensen and Wirth revised by Mickel and Miner, p.110. "Note that file parameters or structured variables with files as components may not be specified as actual variable parameters, as this would constitute an assignment." So, any Pascal compiler that allows this is illegal. You can't fault Encore for requiring legal Pascal. > > Actually, I'm on the side that TeX leaves something to be desired in >that it assumes that a compiler has an otherwise clause on case statements, >which is not part of *vanilla* pascal and has been extended in many different >ways, very few of which are even close to being compatable. Yes, but the file problem is even worse. > >>You should be very careful before you run around calling somebody's >>procuct deficient when you don't know what you're talking about. You owe >>Encore and Oregon Software and apology. > > If he apologizes, will you help him compile it, or will it all just >be whistling in the wind? He did ask for help I believe. In fact, the people >from Encore (sales people, but people all the same) admitted that the Pascal >compiler would not compile TeX, without *lots* of hand massaging, and offered >to help find a source for TeX. It didn't help much since there are some >local mods, that relied upon a virgin source. Yes, but when you ask for help you should not go about claiming somebody's product is "terribly deficient" when it's not. Of course the Encore compiler will not compile that version of TeX because TeX is not written in Pascal, but rather a restricted dialect of Pascal. Secondarily you mention that there are local mods which require a "virgin source". Here we have a second departure from the use of "standard" software. I don't think it's reasonable to make non-standard modifications and then complain about the product failing to adhere to local custom. > > So, something ain't right and *help* would be appreciated. Maybe from >someone who knows what they are talking about... I did, I suggested he use the C version which compiles and runs on the Encore without the slightest problem. We put that version up here without untoward difficulty. I also suggested he contact me for additional help. Again, the original poster stated that the product was deficient and thereby made false statements about the compiler. Such statements can cause harm to the sellers when they are not warranted. If the compiler wouldn't compile the if statement or something like that then he would have a point but here he was wrong and said something that was potentially libelous. If the poster really wanted help he should have asked for it and not trashed the product. It's not conducive to good relations to solicit help by saying something is bad when it works just fine. All that does is get people who know better upset and cast the poster in a very bad light. I am not associated with Encore in any way except as a very satisfied customer and one who has made extensive use of the Pascal compiler and find it to be hands down the best one I have ever used (including the one I wrote in 1980).