lins@Apple.COM (Chuck Lins) (11/14/89)
In article <6422@merlin.usc.edu> ajayshah@aludra.usc.edu (Ajay Shah) writes: >>In article <9686@vax1.cc.lehigh.edu> LUKRW@vax1.cc.lehigh.edu writes: >The most important single aspect where i might have differed from >Borland is that i'd have taken more trouble to create TP >implementations for a coupla other standard machines (Sun, Mac, etc.). >That way, a user has more portability. I've often got stranded when Actually, Borland did move TP to the Mac. Big-time flop. Apple's MPW Object Pascal and Symantec's THINK Pascal essentially have a lock on the market (though a small share goes to TML Pascal). -- Chuck Lins | "Exit left to funway." Apple Computer, Inc. | Internet: lins@apple.com 20525 Mariani Avenue | AppleLink: LINS Mail Stop 41-K | Cupertino, CA 95014 | "Self-proclaimed Object Oberon Evangelist" The intersection of Apple's ideas and my ideas yields the empty set.
daveg@near.cs.caltech.edu (Dave Gillespie) (11/16/89)
In article <36445@apple.Apple.COM> lins@Apple.COM (Chuck Lins) writes: >Actually, Borland did move TP to the Mac. Big-time flop... I was hired a while back by a small CAD company to port their Turbo Pascal application to the Mac. We originally planned to use Turbo-for-the-Mac but had to give up on it because a) it was incredibly buggy and b) it actually compiled a different dialect of Pascal than the PC version! I think if Borland had created a _real_ Turbo Pascal for the Mac, it would not have flopped at all. We certainly needed it. Our eventual solution was to translate the whole thing into C, so that it would be portable across machines. That's how the Pascal to C translator I just posted about learned Turbo Pascal... -- Dave Gillespie 256-80 Caltech Pasadena CA USA 91125 daveg@csvax.caltech.edu, cit-vax!daveg