Re: Pascal for IIgs...

[phoenyx <phoenyx@texas.net>]

Eric Heim wrote:

> > Not to start a compiler war here ...
>
> I choose not to fight, even if one is started :o)
>

Agreed, it's a battle no one can win.

>
> > ... but some of us just like the style of
> > Pascal/Modula2.
>
> Me too. From 1982 to ~'90-'91 (although not programming professionally) it
> was my language of choice.  My intro to computer science class textbook was
> "Oh! Pascal!"  :o)  Pascal was superceeded in my programming fancy by REXX.
> If anyone wants to write a REXX compiler for the IIGS I will buy it :o)
>

All of my programming skills are self taught. This is not the best way to
learn programming but it works for me. Mainly because I can't afford
the cost of the classes and the needed supplies to attend them.

>
> > I understand C, can even write in it some if needed
> > but I don't particularly like the language.
>
> One can learn C in a month, but C is elusive, it really takes years of study
> and practice to understand it. For anybody. Me too, I'm not referring to you
> alone  :o)
>
> > Sure, everyone who's anyone programs in it today, so what.
>
> Here I'll disagree with you. Java is the monster who is eating information
> technology. Yesterday it was C++. Embedded systems is where C is currently
> dominant. Perhaps Unix, but most Unix programmers I know use perl.
>

My view may be tainted. I've been spending a lot of time lately with
Linux. Most apps for this system are written in C and generated with
support from Make and various script languages.

>
> >I'll stick to languages I can easily read without having to focus on the
> >abstract symbols and tricks which most average++ C programmers use.
>
> Ok, I will agree with you, however, I refer you to my sentence above
> beginning with "One can learn..."  :o)
>

I think it's a matter of desire. I suppose if I used it exclusively I
might change my mind.

>
> > Of course I like Applesoft too, it's the first language I learned. But for
> > Basic I like Zbasic better.
>
> I learned BASIC in 1972 on a DEC PDP-8. It was also the first language I
> learned. However, I don't have the soft spot in my heart for BASIC that
> people who learned AppleSoft do.  It is a tribute to Apple and Microsoft.
> Both companies actually must have done something right :o)
>

It's not that they did something right. Actually Applesoft is rather limited.
For me it's more the challenge of creating something useful with it. Also
it's fairly easy to create short term programs for yourself to do simple
tasks on the Apple. Applesoft is easily accessed on any Apple II.

I think it's mainly 'cause I struggled to teach myself applesoft and
have learned (retained) a lot about how it works.

>
> One final note, I posted the book mentioned because Supertimer is not alone.
> C is hard at first and a bad book or a bad teacher makes it all the more
> difficult. If someone doesn't like C because they don't understand it, I
> think King's book will REALLY make a difference. If that same someone
> doesn't choose to learn C, that is fine too. Pascal is good.

C is surround by myths and confusion. In the Apple II world it has
always been this way. While there were a couple of C systems for
the II series they weren't widely available, then Byteworks created
theirs for the IIgs.

Phoenyx