🚀 go-pugleaf

pontius@twonky.btv.ibm.com (Dale Pontius) writes:


>In article <1996Feb9.093206.46004@yogi.urz.unibas.ch>, eglis@ubaclu.unibas.ch (Simon Egli) writes:
>> So, maybe it would help if everybody posts a mail to Borland, that they should
>> move to Oberon, if they want to double their sales :)

>No, because IMHO, Borland killed Pascal. As originally conceived, Pascal
>was a teaching language, practically useless. But people liked it enough
>that they extended it to try to do useful work. Borland had the most
>success with it, and practically built a company beginning with it.

>Borland had the single most successful dialect of Pascal, but they
>killed Pascal because they made no provisions for it going anywhere but
>the PC. So when it came time to start thinking about multiple platforms
>and multiple operating systems, there was no choice other than C. Other
>platforms had their own useful dialects of Pascal, but they didn't
>match each other, and they didn't match Borland, and had no chance on
>the PC.

As I remember, after Borland brought Pascal to a high level of use on
the PC, they then let it ROT for 4? critical years producing useless
crap like Turbo Prolog.  C took hold and Pascal/Modula* were
destroyed.  Jay