bruceh@mntgfx.mentor.com (Bruce Holm) (05/25/89)
-----
I still have LSP v1.11. I am aware that the current version is 2.01.
I am trying to decide if the upgrade is worth it (~$49 + s/h).
I am not a hard core programmer. I have a Mac plus with 2M of RAM
and a 40M hard disk. A while back Rich Siegal gave the following
list of enhancements:
"New and enhanced features of version 2.0 include: a fast, multipass
optimizing compiler which produces compact, commercial-quality code; Object
Pascal support; increased editor flexibility for virtually unlimited program
size; and enhanced source-level debugger; and language extensions for
improved compatibility with Apple's Macintosh Programmer's Workshop (MPW)
Pascal."
fast compiler...good, but I didn't find 1.11 slow.
commercial-quality code...don't plan to sell my programs.
Object Pascal support...what does this do for me?
unlimited program size...good, but haven't run into the limit with 1.11, yet.
enhanced source-level debugger...what kind of enhancements?
language extensions for use with MPW Pascal...don't deal with MPW Pascal, don't have it.
So if this is all that the upgrade buys me, then I have serious doubts as to
the need to upgrade. I would like those of you who have LSP 2.0 to please
respond to me if you have an opinion of if the upgrade would be worth it
for someone in my situation. If there are features that are not mentioned
above (and hence I don't know about them), I'd like to hear about them.
Send e-mail or postings to USENET.
Thanks,
--Bruce Holm
--
** These are my opinions, & not necessarily those of Mentor Graphics Corp. **
Bruce Holm, Design/Analysis Div. / (503) 626-7000
Mentor Graphics Corp. / USENET: bruceh@pdx.MENTOR.COM
Beaverton, OR 97005-7191 / UUCP: ...!{sequent,tessi,apollo}!mntgfx!bruceh siegel@endor.harvard.edu (Rich Siegel) (05/25/89)
In article <1989May24.123418.5967@mntgfx.mentor.com> bruceh@mntgfx.mentor.com (Bruce Holm) writes: >----- > >I still have LSP v1.11. I am aware that the current version is 2.01. >I am trying to decide if the upgrade is worth it (~$49 + s/h). > In addition to that which I've mentioned, I might add that Lightspeed Pascal 2.0 also works correctly on newer machines and under MultiFinder; the code generator is more reliable, and the runtime libraries are much improved in performance and reliability. The Toolbox interfaces are up to date with respect to MPW Pascal 2.02, which means they include the routines up to and including Inside Mac volume 5. The Pascal extensions aren't for "use" with MPW Pascal, they're for compatibility. The extensions include such features as LHS typecasting, function result qualification, EXIT, CYCLE, LEAVE, constant expressions, and short-circuit Boolean operators. These features are useful even if you don't use MPW Pascal. The new source debugger adds the ability (in LightsBug) to display variables symbolically, rather than in hex, and to explode structured and pointer-based types to view their contents symbolically. The manual's also been rewritten, and includes more information and demo programs. IMHO, $49 isn't a whole lot to ask, considering what you get. --Rich ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Rich Siegel Staff Software Developer Symantec Corporation, Language Products Group Internet: siegel@endor.harvard.edu UUCP: ..harvard!endor!siegel "She told me to make myself comfortable, so I pulled down my pants and sat in the pudding." -Emo Phillips ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte) (05/25/89)
In article <1989May24.123418.5967@mntgfx.mentor.com> bruceh@mntgfx.mentor.com (Bruce Holm) writes: >----- >I still have LSP v1.11. I am aware that the current version is 2.01. >I am trying to decide if the upgrade is worth it (~$49 + s/h). >So if this is all that the upgrade buys me, then I have serious doubts as to >the need to upgrade. I would like those of you who have LSP 2.0 to please >respond to me if you have an opinion of if the upgrade would be worth it OK. Me & my friends have used LSP 1.11 and are now using LSP 2.01 here at the R.I.T. LSP 1.11 was buggy, bombed a lot, supported only IM I-III, had some kludgy solutions, generated STUUUPIIIID code and generally was a pain in the *ss (OK, THINK technologies, that's MY opinion. It's a free world after all !) LSP 2.01 is much more reasonable, supports IM I-V (Yeah! that's up to and including system 4.2 ...) doesn't bomb THAT often, has smoother debugging (subjective) and still generates STUPID code (i.e. a ask for a char from an odd address, the compiler fetches the WHOLE WORD -- odd address exception !) and it also has some signed/unsigned incompatibility with LSP 1.11, but the transition 1.11 -> 2.01 is fairly easy. I would pay the $49. I mean, it's not more than you would spend on a night out with your girl friend (at least here in Sweden, where every- thing is SOOOO expensive) and that night you'll probably spend discovering the new features in 2.01 :-) I would go for it (I already have, as mentioned above) -- h+@nada.kth.se <>,, Picture this recording studio somewhere far far away Jon W{tte (:))))=- Brrrrreeeee, you bugger! (Piano in) Oh NO! A bug! <>'' Say kids, what time is it ? It's time for a house. Dizco me to XtaC! OOOOH LAAAH LAAAAA ! (c) HitHouse -- No More --
ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu (05/26/89)
In article <1931@husc6.harvard.edu>, siegel@endor.harvard.edu (Rich Siegel) writes... >In article <1989May24.123418.5967@mntgfx.mentor.com> bruceh@mntgfx.mentor.com (Bruce Holm) writes: >>I still have LSP v1.11. I am aware that the current version is 2.01. >>I am trying to decide if the upgrade is worth it (~$49 + s/h). >> [Rich outlines numerous features of LSP 2.x] > IMHO, $49 isn't a whole lot to ask, considering what you get. > > --Rich Rich basically outlined all the cool new features, as well as the needed updating, so I won't mention that. But subjectively, I can tell you that there is a _big_ improvement from LSP 1.x to 2.x. LightsBug in 2.x is really awesome and makes debugging a lot easier (even if you do need to break out TMON once in awhile). MultiFinder compatibility is really nice if you have more than 1 meg. Basically the entire interface -- which was a bit dated -- has been updated (can you say "zoom box"? :->). All in all it makes coding easier and more pleasant than under 1.x. It would be $49 well spent. Robert ------ ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu ------ generic disclaimer: all my opinions are mine ------ MOFO knows!
dcc@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu (Daniel Carr) (05/26/89)
from a non hard-programmer: LSP 2.0 is worth every penny. it is absolutely the best compiler i have every used. blows turbo out of the water in every way. i'm not sure i'd be completely happy about paying the upgrade fee (i bought mine for $66) but it is worth it. LSP 2.0 has too many great features to list here, but after using 1.11 for a class, i could appreciate 2.0 a lot. how would you like to use cursor keys to edit your program? or click on the top part of a window and get a popup menu of all the procedure and functions? again, $49 is not bad at all, considering what you get. daniel carr
siegel@endor.harvard.edu (Rich Siegel) (05/26/89)
In article <1091@draken.nada.kth.se> d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte) writes: >(i.e. a ask for a char from an odd address, the compiler fetches the >WHOLE WORD -- odd address exception !) and it also has some signed/unsigned The "char" data type is two bytes, not one. Thus, the whole-word fetch. Use "SignedByte" if you want one-byte size. --Rich ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Rich Siegel Staff Software Developer Symantec Corporation, Language Products Group Internet: siegel@endor.harvard.edu UUCP: ..harvard!endor!siegel "She told me to make myself comfortable, so I pulled down my pants and sat in the pudding." -Emo Phillips ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~