🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Article #3351

Re: Turbo Pascal vs. C

#3351
From: Russell Poffenberger
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 1990 22:00
62 lines
2853 bytes
In article <1990Sep20.164153.28641@portia.Stanford.EDU> dma@nova.stanford.edu (Domingo A. Mihovilovic) writes:
>Yes!, Turbo Pascal is the best system to develop programs today. It has
>all extensions and capabilities you will need ( from the lowest level to
>objects ).

But pascal was never intended to be a "useful" language. It was developed as
an aid in teaching structured programming. C is much more accepted as an
industry standard for software programming than pascal.

>It is a very optimized and very fast compiler. I got recently Turbo C++.
>Even though it is very fast among the C compilers it is more than 20
>times slower than Turbo Pascal. 
>
>	Another good point of TP is that it has an integrated environment with
>which you can get work done very quickly (turbo C has also a very good
>environment). Some other compilers claim to have integrated environments
>but they are useless.
>As an example in the PWB (Programmer's Workbench) of Microsoft C 6.0. To do
>
>	- run the PWB and load the program.
>	- compile the program.
>	- execute the program from the PWB.
>	- return to PWB.
>
>takes 3 minutes with the simplest program you can write
>
>#include <stdio.h>
>
>main()
>{
>printf("hello World!\n") ;
>}
>
>What kind of integrated environment is this ?? 
>
>Just to compile the program takes 60 seconds !!!

I agree that MSC is quite slow, however it is thorough. Also TC++ will not do
Windows. (Not yet)

>
>In Turbo Pascal it takes 2 seconds to compile a more than 1400 line
>program ( BGIDEMO.PAS, a graphics demo that comes with the system).
>
>All times were measured in a 386sx machine and DOS 3.3
>
>
>	
>	The only reason to use something different would be portability to some
>other platform, but is you are interested only in the IBM PC TPascal 5.5
>is the best choice.

If you want to be more portable, and inline with industry standards, use C. If
you want to ride the wave of the future (Object Oriented Programming) use C++.

Turbo C++ is quite good and is also fully compatible with straight C.


Russ Poffenberger               DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com
Schlumberger Technologies       UUCP:   {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen
1601 Technology Drive		CIS:	72401,276
San Jose, Ca. 95110             (408)437-5254
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1990Sep21.220031.19274@sj.ate.slb.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!mips!sjsca4!poffen
References: <F*=-d162@cs.psu.edu> <1990Sep20.164153.28641@portia.Stanford.EDU>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!mips!sjsca4!poffen
From: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russell Poffenberger)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: Turbo Pascal vs. C
Message-ID: <1990Sep21.220031.19274@sj.ate.slb.com>
Date: 21 Sep 90 22:00:31 GMT
References: <F*=-d162@cs.psu.edu> <1990Sep20.164153.28641@portia.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russell Poffenberger)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Schlumberger Technologies, San Jose, CA.
Lines: 62