🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <l1hmxkp@lynx.unm.edu> iuzzolin@carina.unm.edu (Harold Iuzzolino) writes:
[Tons of stuff deleted]
>This is one nice thing about TP:
>
>function BoolTest(x,y:byte): boolean;
>begin
> ...
>end;
>
>begin
> if BoolTest(10,40) then InsertAnotherSpiffyProcedureNameHereIfYouWant;
>end.
> 
This is simple to do in C.
I always include

#define True -1
#define False 0
typedef char bool
typedef unsigned char byte

then you can just say

bool BoolTest(byte x,byte y) {
...
}

...
  if (BoolTest(10,40)) {
    foo();
    }

I think it's pretty funny when people argue about Pascal and C, when
I consider them about the same.  I think an argument about C/Pascal
against Lisp/Prolog would be more fun.  I think the one BIG argument
for C is portability.  I just saw a post for a Ray tracer that works
with Amigas, Macs, IBM's, and Unices, all with the same source code.
You just can't do that Pascal.  I don't think that this necessarily
means that C is better, it just happened that C became the "portable"
language.  Why hasn't the US switched to Metric yet???  Is it because
our system is better, no, it just happened.  It's the same way
as HAYES-compatible modems, EPSON-printers, etc. One language/thing
gets accepted by a number of people, and then someone says, hey
lets make a "standard".  The original Unix could have been written
in Pascal, why not, then maybe someone would have said, hey lets make
a "Standard" Pascal that will work on any machine, it just didn't
happen that way... 


-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
           -Linux Rules-                |
  -"I've been Dos free for 30 days      |
    now."-Former Dos Addict             | Address: woody@cs.utexas.edu