[net.lang] Mainsail and Lisa: results

jmcg (04/07/83)

I got a call from Gary Jirak of Xidak.  He wants me to set the record
straight with respect to Mainsail and Lisa:  The Lisa implementation
language was an amplified Pascal, not Mainsail.  The claim regarding
Mainsail apparently arose from some confusion about Xidak's offer or
willingness to do a port of Mainsail to Lisa.

He also wanted to suppress the MAchine INdependent SAIL notion.
Mainsail is its own language and is not particularly like SAIL (not
much more than it's like ALGOL).

I've been encouraged by the responses and phone conversations and have
come to the conclusion that Mainsail could have a role in our
project--if the terms of the educational license are favorable, we
should be able to incorporate it as part of our package.

That address again, folks:
	Xidak
	530 Oak Grove Ave., Suite 101
	Menlo Park, CA  94025
	(415)324-8745)

[Remind me to describe our project to you sometime: we're trying to put
together a "biochemistry workstation".]
							Jim McGinness
		sdcsvax!jmcg	(619)452-4016		UC San Diego, Chemistry
	   or	decvax!jmcg
----------
Below is a synopsis of some of the replies I received:
----------
A comment on MainSail only being available from Xidak:
Have you ever used Simula?  It's ONLY available from the Norwegian
Computing Center, and they ONLY send out binaries of the compiler, with
time bombs in them, forcing you to get updates regularly.  Apparently
it is also expensive - at Wisconsin, on the Univac 1110, there was an
extra 20 cent surcharge every time you used the Simula compiler.  As a
result, there is a fixed set of machines you can get Simula for, and
VAX/UNIX is not one of them.  As for maintaining a consistent version
across machines, I wonder how well this can be done.  Simula would
print an "extension warning" every time you used the DO-UNTIL
construction, because it was not in the common base language.  On the
other hand, PCC seems to support a very consistent language, if an
inconsistent library.

Unless they force you to use their editor, I don't see what the
relevance of its existence is.  It merely proves you can write an
editor in MainSail.  (I wonder how they make it work on virtually any
CRT portably?  Does it use termcap? How do they portably get the
terminal type.  I wonder how well it performs at low baud rates, and
how many terminals it really supports.
---------
We had mainsail at our site for evaluation.  We were not impressed.
That is, some of us were not impressed.  Mainsail is like C with
strings and modules added.  The modules are similar to the way a good
structured program is written in C; with related functions together in
a file as a module.  The only difference is that mainsail formalizes
the module idea and makes it a requirement.

Good things about mainsail:  processor independence.  I really believe
that a mainsail program will run the same anywhere.  This is a nice
feature.  Dynamic linking.  Everybody's object code doesn't carry
around an image of all the standard libraries.  Everybody's code
doesn't have to be recompiled when you change the kernel.  The
potential of the user interface.  Mainsail has an integrated user
interface where the editor commands are always available (something
like running the shell in a Gosling Emacs window.)

Bad things about Mainsail:  Xidak has a monopoly.  Xidak is not very
big.  Mainsail is not able to run on a Z80.  mainsail is not even able
to run on a PDP-11 although they said for enough money they might try
to squeeze it into a separate I/D machine.  Mainsail requires a hard
disk due to the dynamic linking.  The user interface sucks.  The
concept is right but the implementation is weak.  The programming
environment is confusing: you can't tell easily if you are in the
editor or debugger or compiler or what.  Bugs are evident in several
places.
---------
There's also the favorable review posted by K. S. Bhaskar (fluke.844).