🚀 go-pugleaf

I have another few pennies worth of comments on the message of
'heiser@ethz.uucp':
One thing that clearly speaks in favour of the Cambridge compiler is the
nice library that comes with it. Too sad the people there decided to go
their own way and not implement an InOut module, but rather their 'TextIO'
which is not bad, but does not really contribute to portability!
Also, tools like m2make are quite useful; however, it has no support for
the m2c '-m' switch -- something that makes it really useless in some
circumstances!
One REALLY BIG disadvantage of the Cambridge compiler: It does not work
with dbx! Look guys, even in a "perfect"(??) language as Modula-2, one
still has to do some debugging. Now, dbx is the standard-debugger for UNIX,
and it is a really powerful one, too. The debugger that comes with the
Cambridge implementation is just crappy and useless for any practical
purpose. Considering how easy it is to add support for dbx, I cannot
understand why the people at Cambridge had to chose this awkward option!
As far as I'm concerned, the ability to use such a powerful debugger far
outweighs the other advantages of the Cambridge-system. The Cambridge
library, I can port to the DEC compiler easily (in fact, we have done that
already) and I still can write my own makefiles
As far as I'm converned, I'll stick to the DEC product!

usu. disclaimer: I am not associated with either DEC or Cambridge, nobody
else knows that I'm writing this and nobody is responsible for the content
of this message!