In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >, Guido Gonzato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > >Why was Turbo Pascal so successful? > >Beacuse it broke all possible Pascal standard in existance.
Not at all. It was successful for a different reason entirely. > >It took ISO Pascal, smashed it to the ground, burnt it, turned it to >ashes, spit on it, peed on the remains and the rain swept them away. Rubbish. Forgive me for being so abrupt but only in one area was TP not compliant with ISO pascal. (GOTOing out of a procedure was legal in ISO and has never been implemented to this day in Pascal or Delphi). Otherwise it was an extension of pascal but broke none of its rules. It was not the fact that it broke the rules which made it popular, it was the price and convenience. > >Turbo Pascal broke standards for "broke" read "extended": it only broke a small one which most programmers do not like anyway. >to make it possible to write real programs, >and set a standard by itself. abcm2ps extends a (loosely defined) standard >to make it possible to write "real" scores. It always was possible to write real programs without TP or Borland Pascal. For a decade before Delphi came along I used the British, brilliant, fast and reliable "Prospero Pascal" to write commercial software: it merely required libraries of routines extending the functionality in a completely compliant way. It was the simple price and convenience of operation of TP which made it so attractive. Whether it was better is a moot point, because on the basis of the above it swept the market fairly quickly. Sorry to disagree with your example but in this case Might Won the Day, not functionality. > >Another guy who broke most standard of his time was a fellow called Jesus >Christ. Amongst other things, He tried to teach the Jews that healing a >man is more important than respecting the Sabbath. > >I'll repeat that to the end of my days: people's needs FIRST, then >standards compliance. Non-compliance is an absolute pain unless you have the clout to blow away ALL the opposition. And we know what a mess extensions have become in abc notation simply because there was not a standard in existence at the point when extensions were needed. > >It should be clear that the two of us have different goals, but I don't >think what we're doing is incompatible. Bernard Hill Braeburn Software Author of Music Publisher system Music Software written by musicians for musicians http://www.braeburn.co.uk Selkirk, Scotland To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
