sidd@pnet01.CTS.COM (Isaac Huerta) (10/11/87)
I'am a student at S.D.S.U. and I'am looking for a Pascal Compiler to
run at home, instead of fighting it out at the campus computing center.
I really don't care if the compiler is portable to other machines as I'll
only be using it for homework assignments.
Has anyone had any experiance with Turbo Pascal by Bordland ?
If so, is the suitable for a novice???
any info will be greatly appreciated,
Isaac Huerta
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UUCP: {cbosgd, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!pnet01!sidd
ARPA: crash!pnet01!sidd@nosc.mil
INET: sidd@pnet01.CTS.COM
_______________________________________________________________________________Isaac_K_Rabinovitch@cup.portal.com (10/13/87)
Isaac Heurta (no relation) writes:
->I'am a student at S.D.S.U. and I'am looking for a Pascal Compiler to
->run at home, instead of fighting it out at the campus computing center.
->I really don't care if the compiler is portable to other machines as I'll
->only be using it for homework assignments.
-> Has anyone had any experiance with Turbo Pascal by Bordland ?
-> If so, is the suitable for a novice???
My experience with Turbo 3.0 (the new 4.0 is a new can of worms) was
brief and painful, but it still seems to be the Pascal of choice for
someone like you, especially if your machine has limited memory and
only one floppy drive. It's inexpensive, it's got an integral editor,
it's simple to use, and it caters to people who are still struggling
with Pascal syntax.
I have reservations, though (some of which don't apply to 4.0, but I'm
not familiar with that one). The manual is really awful; it was written
(by someone not very self expressive) for the CP/M version and the MS-DOS
stuff is just pasted on. You might want to check out books written
about TP, there are a ton of them. If you're using one of the Cooper/
Clancy books, you should look for Cooper's Oh! Turbo!
The compiler is sloppy in places. For example, READLN input of a number
is supposed to be terminated by any input that isn't part of the number.
Turbo insists that the number be followed by a space or end-of-line.
That's the sort of error that unnecessarily corrupts the beginner's
faith in his own intelligence. With this sort of problem, it helps
to have a symbolic debugger. I've seen some interesting looking ones
that are Public Domain on various BBSs.
Still, on balance Turbo Pascal is the first choice (probably the only
choice!) for the beginner.Randomizer@cup.portal.com (10/13/87)
I my opinion turbo 3.xx is very good for beginners. Turbo 4.0 may not be as user friendly (judging from brochure) but Borland is an excellent company -- with excellent products. Randomizer@cup.portal.com standard disclaimer applies
hooper@leadsv.UUCP (Ken Hooper) (10/14/87)
My experience with Turbo Pascal has been a long and happy one. I admit it has limitations; it is unsuitable for development of very large programs, but I wouldn't think that would concern a novice. Its limitations are: It is limited to 64K of code. It cannot link separately compiled modules. It is limited to 64K of non-dynamic variable space (dynamic space is limited only by available memory). It is limited to 64K of heap space. Its integral editor is a poor WordStar subset. Except for the editor, I have never felt any of these limitations, but I have never written a program over 1400 lines long. If you're trying to write real applications programs, like professional quality editors, spreadsheets or CAD programs, these limitations will be crippling (but then, these applications generally require assembly or a powerful `C' anyway). Its Advantages: Development is very quick (I have written and debugged ~40 liners in 5 min.) It can return you to the appropriate place in the editor upon detecting errors, including run-time errors. It contains sufficient enhancements to standard Pascal, to make it a usable language (i.e. strings, graphics, real I/O, access to the operating system, direct access to memory, etc.) It allows in-line assembly code (albeit inconveniently) thus eliminating the need for separate compilation and linking. (Assembly language allows for fine optimization of time-critical operations.) Its very fast, particularly in compilation. With a powerful Pascal like Microsoft's, entering an editor, finding and making a change, exiting the editor, compiling, linking, and finally executing, will take several minutes even on trivial programs. Using Turbo Pascal, inserting a semi-colon (the most common error I've found by far), recompiling, etc. takes seconds. I learned Pascal on an HP `Chipmunk', where most of the time was spent waiting for the compiler; entering the program and the cerebral part of debugging, were almost incidental. Using Turbo Pascal shifts the emphasis radically; now the time to type the program is dominant, and debugging is almost fun. But the greatest effect on my programming style, is that I experiment now; the effort of just getting anything to run is no longer so great that, when done, I have no interest in fiddling with it to make it better. And I can develop tools for doing complex global operations on data-bases and text files, in less time than it would take to do it with even a good editor. > My experience with Turbo 3.0 (the new 4.0 is a new can of worms) was > brief and painful, but it still seems to be the Pascal of choice for > someone like you, especially if your machine has limited memory and > only one floppy drive. It's inexpensive, it's got an integral editor, > it's simple to use, and it caters to people who are still struggling > with Pascal syntax. I'm using a full-up Compaq Deskpro w/ V30 and Hard Disk, and I'm struggling with APL and SmallTalk. Ken Hooper