🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <133@ra.abo.fi> rosenber@ra.abo.fi (Robin Rosenberg INF) writes:
>Where did Pascal enter? Thought this was M2 vs C.

Actually, so far it hasn't been a full fledged M2 vs C war, and I hope
it doesn't become one. Simply comparing features of languages is
relatively innocuous, as far as it goes.

>Wirth made both Pascal
>and Modula2. That's what they have in common. Period.

Well, no, that's an overstatement. If you look at a C program, an M2
program and a Pascal program you'll notice far more similarities between
M2 and Pascal. M2 is based on most of the same philosophies as Pascal
but with the intention of having it be a practical tool (the original Pascal
was a teaching tool), and this results in M2 looking like a "grown up"
version of standard Pascal. No other two commonly used commercially available
languages resemble each other as much as M2 and Pascal.

But I think your main point, that you can't judge M2 by looking at
Pascal, is perfectly valid.

> Furthermore, which
>programming language you use is determined by (in priority)
>
>	1. Your employer (his religous belief). If he allows then 2.
>	2. You (Your religion), if your language isn't suitable then 3
>	3. The requirements of the problem to be solved. 

Unfortunately I think that usually it's just 1 & 2 without 3 as an option.
Whereas ideally it would be *just* 3 by itself.

> There is no reason to have a religous war
>in a group where you are supposed to have TECHNICAL discussion.

Agreed. Let's keep it neutral.

>I've made some comparisons between the two rivals. [...lengthy...]

Interesting comparisons.
	Doug
-- 
Doug Merritt		{pyramid,apple}!xdos!doug
Member, Crusaders for a Better Tomorrow		Professional Wildeyed Visionary