Allison wrote:
> I disagree. The UCSD version was an excellent teaching tool but
> slower than sludge due to the P-code thing. Later implementations
> namely JRT and Borland were very useful tools.
Lets face it the 8080/Z80 6502 and the 8086 (with no math co-processer)
are very limited cpu's. P-code is easy to emulate on a small (and brain
dead) CPU's. I had looked at Pascal a few times but often features like
SETS and cursor addressing often changed between different venders
making
less than portable code. Also I/O was different between Files and
Terminals
making harder to write generic I/O. I think C took off because it had
fairly (for that time) standard I/O.
> Other than that, computer HLLs are like religion, hold the evangelism
> to a dull roar as the music section may not listen and the non believers
> have left the room. ;)
I think small and clean ( bootstrap able too is handy) languages are few
and far between. C was that at one time, but not any more. While I don't
expect complers to run in 64kb I think 64 Meg is far too much bloat.
--
Ben Franchuk - Dawn * 12/24 bit cpu *
www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/index.html
Received on Mon May 06 2002 - 11:14:49 BST