wjones@andromeda.rutgers.edu.rutgers.edu (Wendell E Jones) (05/12/89)
I was wondering .. Do any companys in the real world actually use pascal in programming. * W.E.Jones A.K.A. The Ronin |"I'm a certified nut * * U.S.Mail 91 Ackerson St. Hackensack New Jersey 07601| with a history of * * "Nan ja desu karma ka? Karma desu karma. Neh?" | violence!!!" * * "Lesson #1: Never no never underestimate your own stupitity"| M. Keaton *
RDK%vm.temple.edu@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Robert Keiser) (05/12/89)
On 12 May 89 01:48:07 GMT you said: > > I was wondering .. Do any companys in the real world actually use > pascal in programming. > Yes, the Phila. Stock exchange uses Pascal for the majority of its realtime programs. Robert Keiser
soper@xenna.UUCP (Pete Soper,,,) (05/12/89)
From article <May.11.21.48.07.1989.11277@galaxy.rutgers.edu>, by wjones@andromeda.rutgers.edu.rutgers.edu (Wendell E Jones): > > I was wondering .. Do any companys in the real world actually use > pascal in programming. > A for instance: Encore's C, Fortran, and Pascal compilers for National 32k and Motorola 88k targets are all themselves large pascal programs, so those of us working on these compilers are using pascal. However Pascal use is in the minority at Encore, to say the least. Now, as to whether this is the real world. That's the part of your question that I find tough to answer :-) --------------------------------------------------------- Pete Soper, Encore Computer Corp, 901 Kildaire Farm Rd., bldg D Cary, North Carolina 27511 USA phone 1 919 481 3730 arpa: soper@encore.com (129.91.1.14) uucp: {talcott,linus,bu-cs,bellcore,decvax,necntc}!encore!soper
thurn@spruce.cis.ohio-state.edu (Martin 'Sulu' Thurn) (05/13/89)
In article <May.11.21.48.07.1989.11277@galaxy.rutgers.edu> wjones@andromeda (the ronin) writes: > > I was wondering .. Do any companys in the real world actually use > pascal in programming. We, too, probably do not qualify as being "real world", but having our Indoor Sporting Systems (a.k.a. FlyBall) umpire/scorekeeping/statistics software featured on NBC Nightly News on Thursday May 11 is probably a step in the right direction!! (Watch for an article in Sports Illustrated, too (they better mention the software...:-) ) We (all 2 of us) program exclusively in good old TurboPascal 5.0, although I'm anxious to dabble some routines in TurboC. -=- _____________________________________________________________________________ Martin Thurn | Gods are like that. It's not enough that they can thurn@cis.ohio-state.edu| control everything. They want to be famous, too. "nihongo demo doozo!" | --- Orson Scott Card
leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) (05/14/89)
In article <May.11.21.48.07.1989.11277@galaxy.rutgers.edu> wjones@andromeda (the ronin) writes:
<
< I was wondering .. Do any companys in the real world actually use
< pascal in programming.
I'm responsible for a system of programs that our QA department uses.
Around a megabyte of Turbo Pascal source. At the time it was originally
set up, they had 3 choices.
BASIC (Microsoft BASCOM 2.0)
C (Microsoft C 1.0?)
Pascal (Turbo Pascal 3.0)
They picked Pascal as it was the easiest to maintain (in the sense of
being able to drop it into someone's lap and have any hope that they
could get up to speed quickly). Unfortunately, the guy who did the
original coding was a COBOL programmer and wasn't too familiar with
Pascal. So I've been fighting things like 12 *page* procedures for the
last four years.
Now they want a massive number of improvements all at once and they
realize that I can't have it done in the time allotted (partly because
I'm lucky to be able to spend 5-10% of my time on coding, due to staff
shortages in Micro support) So they've turned it over to the regular DP
people who are going write a new set of programs and run them on the
VAX. <sigh> (and the users actually think that they'll be able to get
changes implemented faster this way... :-)
--
Leonard Erickson ...!tektronix!reed!percival!bucket!leonard
CIS: [70465,203]
"I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools.
Let's start with typewriters." -- Solomon Shortrmarks@KSP.Unisys.COM (Richard Marks) (05/14/89)
In article <May.11.21.48.07.1989.11277@galaxy.rutgers.edu> wjones@andromeda: > I was wondering .. Do any companys in the real world actually use > pascal in programming. This is in NO WAY an official response. I speak for me. etc. ! To my knowledge Unisys does not use Pascal. For our PC and Unix programming we use C (plus all the 4GL's like lotus-123, Dbase, etc). For the 1100's we use a lot of assembler and a bit of an language called PLUS (Programming Language for Univac Systems). PLUS is the expected ALGOL derivative and resembles PASCAL. But, there isreally atrivial difference between C, PASCAL, etc. If I interviewed at a firm, and they were concerned if I knew C rather than PASCAL, I would think this is a petty, short-sighted firm. Richard Marks rmarks@KSP.unisys.COM
drc@claris.com (Dennis Cohen) (05/18/89)
In article <May.11.21.48.07.1989.11277@galaxy.rutgers.edu> wjones@andromeda: > I was wondering .. Do any companys in the real world actually use > pascal in programming. In the Macintosh arena there is quite a bit of Pascal (six of Claris's nine Mac products are written in Pascal). The differences between C and Pascal, in the implementations available on the Mac, are very minor with advantages to both in different areas. There is a fair amount of Pascal used at places like JPL and Ames, just as there is a lot of C, FORTRAN, and Ada. Language discussions are like those of religion -- the participants get morally outraged, nobody's mind gets changed, and nothing comes of it but ill. Use what does the job for you. -- Dennis Cohen Claris Corp. ------------ Disclaimer: Any opinions expressed above are _MINE_!
las) (05/23/89)
In article <695@bbking.KSP.Unisys.COM> rmarks@KSP.Unisys.COM (Richard Marks) writes: }But, there isreally atrivial difference between C, PASCAL, etc. If I }interviewed at a firm, and they were concerned if I knew C rather than }PASCAL, I would think this is a petty, short-sighted firm. Happens all the time, though. Sigh. regards, Larry -- Signed: Larry A. Shurr (cbema!las@att.ATT.COM or att!cbema!las) Clever signature, Wonderful wit, Outdo the others, Be a big hit! - Burma Shave (With apologies to the real thing. The above represents my views only.) (Please note my mailing address. Mail sent directly to cbnews doesn't make it.)
c289-ch@seymour.Berkeley.EDU (Class Account) (05/23/89)
}But, there isreally atrivial difference between C, PASCAL, etc. If I }interviewed at a firm, and they were concerned if I knew C rather than }PASCAL, I would think this is a petty, short-sighted firm. Well, there is quite a difference you see. If you are use to writing in pascal, your code will be clear and understandable, whereas if you are use to C, then your code will be much more cryptic and hard to debug. If most of the money in software is spent on maintaince, you can see why they would want to hire C programmers --it gives them something to do.
lth@uoregon.uoregon.edu (Lars Thomas Hansen) (05/26/89)
In article <14080@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c289-ch@seymour.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Class Account) writes:
$}But, there isreally atrivial difference between C, PASCAL, etc. If I
$}interviewed at a firm, and they were concerned if I knew C rather than
$}PASCAL, I would think this is a petty, short-sighted firm.
$
$Well, there is quite a difference you see. If you are use to writing in pascal,
$your code will be clear and understandable, whereas if you are use to C, then
$your code will be much more cryptic and hard to debug.
This is easily the most ignorant remark I've heard in a long time. I claim
- and expect to be believed - that nothing stops you from writing C code that
is at least readable and maintainable as the equivalent Pascal code. I do it
all the time.
However, there IS quite a difference between Pascal and C -- C lets you do
what you want to do when you need to do it. Pascal doesn't, in a lot of cases.
--larslas) (05/27/89)
In article <4764@uoregon.uoregon.edu> lth@drizzle.UUCP (Lars Thomas Hansen) writes: }In article <14080@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c289-ch@seymour.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Class Account) writes: }}}But, there isreally atrivial difference between C, PASCAL, etc. If I }}}interviewed at a firm, and they were concerned if I knew C rather than }}}PASCAL, I would think this is a petty, short-sighted firm. }}Well, there is quite a difference you see. If you are use to writing }}in pascal, your code will be clear and understandable, whereas if you }}are use to C, then your code will be much more cryptic and hard to debug. }This is easily the most ignorant remark I've heard in a long time... Well it isn't the most ignorant remark I've heard lately. Nor is it the most inane, nor the most pompous, nor assinine... self-serving... foolish... stupid... short-sighted... fatuous... empty-headed... prejudiced thing I've heard now or ever. It's not even the most inflamatory - which, I suspect, was the whole purpose. regards, Larry -- Signed: Larry A. Shurr (cbema!las@att.ATT.COM or att!cbema!las) Clever signature, Wonderful wit, Outdo the others, Be a big hit! - Burma Shave (With apologies to the real thing. The above represents my views only.) (Please note my mailing address. Mail sent directly to cbnews doesn't make it.)
hartung@amos.ling.ucsd.edu (Jeff Hartung) (05/27/89)
In article <6921@cbnews.ATT.COM> cbema!las@cbnews.ATT.COM (Larry A. Shurr) writes: }In article <4764@uoregon.uoregon.edu> lth@drizzle.UUCP (Lars Thomas Hansen) writes: }}In article <14080@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c289-ch@seymour.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Class Account) writes: }}}}But, there isreally atrivial difference between C, PASCAL, etc. If I }}}}interviewed at a firm, and they were concerned if I knew C rather than }}}}PASCAL, I would think this is a petty, short-sighted firm. } }}}Well, there is quite a difference you see. If you are use to writing }}}in pascal, your code will be clear and understandable, whereas if you }}}are use to C, then your code will be much more cryptic and hard to debug. } }}This is easily the most ignorant remark I've heard in a long time... } }Well it isn't the most ignorant remark I've heard lately. Nor is it the }most inane, nor the most pompous, nor assinine... self-serving... foolish... Gee, I haven't seen stuff like this since I stopped reading misc.headlines and ca.politics! (Yawn. :-) --Jeff Hartung-- Disclaimer: My opinions only, etc., etc., BLAH! BLAH! BLAH!... ARPA - hartung@amos.ucsd.edu UUCP - ucsd!amos.ucsd.edu!hartung
rang@cpsin3.cps.msu.edu (Anton Rang) (05/27/89)
I wasn't going to followup to this, but...
I must admit that (based on my rather limited experience), people
who learn Pascal as a first language tend(*) to write more readable
code than those who learn C first. Maybe it's because Pascal
encourages (not quite forces) people not to use cryptic code; maybe
it's because instructors in Pascal courses put more emphasis on
readability.
This applies whether they're writing in C, Pascal, or whatever.
It's possible to write readable C, and it's possible to write
unreadable Pascal....
What businesses should do isn't worry about which languages somebody
knows (as long as they know a similar language; Pascal/C are close,
but C and Ada are quite different, for instance). They should take
the time to have somebody look at the code people write....
Anton
(*) -- I said TEND. This means that ON THE AVERAGE, of the people
I've seen, Pascal-first people seem to write more readable code.
But maybe it's all coincidence.
+---------------------------+------------------------+
| Anton Rang (grad student) | "VMS Forever!" |
| Michigan State University | rang@cpswh.cps.msu.edu |
+---------------------------+------------------------+