6600john%ucsbuxa@hub.ucsb.edu (10/13/89)
Pascal, as most people know, was created by good ol' NW as a teaching language. Since then it has been evolved by many, especially Borland International, to a full fledged PROFESSIONAL development enviornment. Just the size alone of its user base should help qualify TP as one of the leading standards for Pascal. Microsofts endorsement of TP extensions to the Pascal language help further it as a standard. I feel that it would help this conference if in the subject area people make reference to the version of Pascal they are using, so that people can screen the messages. But in order to do this we need to standardize the names of the various implementations.
DN5@PSUVM.BITNET (10/16/89)
In article <21128@adm.BRL.MIL>, 6600john%ucsbuxa@hub.ucsb.edu says: >the leading standards for Pascal. Microsofts endorsement of TP >extensions to the Pascal language help further it as a standard. Parden me, but I haven't heard that Microsoft endorsed any of TPs extensions. Would some kind soul please enlighten me as to which of Turbo's extentions have been endorsed by Microsoft. D. Jay Newman DN5 at PSUVM.PSU.EDU DN5 AT PSUVM.BITNET
swh@hpcupt1.HP.COM (Steve Harrold) (10/17/89)
Re: Microsoft and TP extensions While MS will never say they ENDORSE the extensions, their recent product QuickPascal is said to be able to compile any TurboPascal source file. This sure sounds like de facto endorsement, wouldn't you say?
steve@basser.oz (Stephen Russell) (10/17/89)
In article <89289.090606DN5@PSUVM.BITNET> DN5@PSUVM.BITNET writes: > >Parden me, but I haven't heard that Microsoft endorsed any of TPs >extensions. Would some kind soul please enlighten me as to which >of Turbo's extentions have been endorsed by Microsoft. > Ref: BYTE, Aug 1989, pp 19. A Microsoft ad for QuickPascal says "Naturally, our Pascal is also fully source compatible with Turbo Pascal". This is close to an endorsement? I found it amusing to find Microsoft having to make this claim. I actually question whether it is true. The reviews I have seen comparing the OOP extensions for QP and TP say they are different in several areas. So, is Microsoft claiming compatibility with an earlier TP (say 4.0)?
880716a@aucs.uucp (Dave Astels) (10/18/89)
In article <89289.090606DN5@PSUVM.BITNET> DN5@PSUVM.BITNET writes: >Parden me, but I haven't heard that Microsoft endorsed any of TPs >extensions. Quick Pascal from Microsoft claims to be compatible with TP (5.0 I think). If that's not an endorsement, I don't know what is. Of course, Borland did a far better job at adding OOP to the TP 5.0 language. So good of a job infact, that I am tentatively planning to use it as the implementation language for my upcoming thesis. -- - Dave Internet: 880716a@AcadiaU.CA Bitnet: 880716a@Acadia
eb2e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Eric James Bales) (10/18/89)
>Parden me, but I >haven't heard that Microsoft endorsed any of TPs extensions. >Would some kind soul please enlighten me as to which of >Turbo's extentions have been endorsed by Microsoft. Microsoft Quick Pascal supports most (if not all) of TPs extensions. MS Quick C also supports most (if not all) of TCs extensions to that language also. -Eric Kirkbride- Carnegie Mellon Disclaimer: I didn't say a thing...