Sujet : Re: The joy of FORTRAN
De : antispam (at) *nospam* fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch)
Groupes : alt.folklore.computers comp.os.linux.miscDate : 30. Sep 2024, 11:58:09
Autres entêtes
Organisation : To protect and to server
Message-ID : <vde07v$f80q$2@paganini.bofh.team>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
User-Agent : tin/2.6.2-20221225 ("Pittyvaich") (Linux/6.1.0-9-amd64 (x86_64))
In alt.folklore.computers Peter Flass <
peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On 25 Sep 2024 04:38:54 GMT, rbowman wrote:
Better Pascal than Modula/Modula-2.
It’s in the name: “modular”. Pascal had features like I/O and memory
management as predefined functions/procedures; Modula-2 made them into
library routines that could be implemented in Modula-2 itself.
Why? So that Modula-2 could be used to write an actual operating system
(Medos, for the Lilith workstation), which you couldn’t do in Pascal
alone.
Operating Systems written in FPC
https://wiki.freepascal.org/Operating_Systems_written_in_FPC
I don’t know how much has been added to FPC above the base language.
Free Pascal started as open source implementation of Borland Turbo
Pascal. Turbo Pascal added esentailly all features of C like
casts, pointer arithmetic and bit operations. And Turbo Pascal
programs massively used inline assembly (Free Pascal is intended
to be partable and I saw no example of inline assemby in Free
Pascal but I think that it is supported).
-- Waldek Hebisch
…