From:	AndrewJ <luminous-is AT REMOVE DOT home DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Odp: Warning : if (x=y)
Message-ID:	<rmuqrs4j9fiqnt54e9kd67o0k1v429ouad@4ax.com>
References:	<8pd7q6$ljs$2 AT info DOT cyf-kr DOT edu DOT pl> <8pdc2s$1b6$2 AT news DOT luth DOT se> <afelrschg9sb1dd01iktt3jnnivl6o86jn AT 4ax DOT com> <8pfrln$mbq$1 AT info DOT cyf-kr DOT edu DOT pl>
X-Newsreader:	Forte Agent 1.7/32.534
MIME-Version:	1.0
Lines:	58
Date:	Tue, 12 Sep 2000 00:41:08 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host:	24.42.120.18
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT home DOT net
X-Trace:	news3.rdc1.on.home.com 968719268 24.42.120.18 (Mon, 11 Sep 2000 17:41:08 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Mon, 11 Sep 2000 17:41:08 PDT
Organization:	Excite AT Home - The Leader in Broadband
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

On Sun, 10 Sep 2000 13:36:44 +0200, "Rafał Maj" <r_maj AT poczta DOT onet DOT pl> wrote:
>
>AndrewJ <luminous-is AT REMOVE DOT home DOT com> wrote :
>> On 9 Sep 2000 12:57:00 GMT, Martin Str|mberg <ams AT father DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
>wrote:
>>
>> >: I have use Turbo Pascal for over 6 years, so now in C++  I'm often
>writing
>>
>> Hahahahahahahaha.... sorry... Pascal... hahahahaha...
>>
>
>1) In Poland (country in central Europ ;) ) Turbo Pascal is used in all
>schools for lerning programming.

I know what Poland is.  At the risk of starting a flame... I'm Canadian, not
American (not implying anything, just that Canucks seem to know more about
Europe than /most/ Americans).

>2) 6 years ago, on my 286 16 Hz it was quite difficult to compile anything
>in C++ ;)

Fair enough.

>3) Turbo Pascal works now on my 525 Celeron faster ten C++... 2000 lines
>program will compile and build in about 0.5 s in TP, and about 6 s in C++.
>When you compile program often, this difference is important.

Be that as it may, TP was written to be fast, but (IIRC) not a very aggressive
optimizer.  Same with the Borland C compilers.  GCC/GPP oto, are very good
optimizers, but that takes time.

>But I agree that it's imposible to write bigger programs in TP, especialy in
>standart (not Borland) version, with 64 Kb code segment limit. Ofcourse, C
>is much more flexible, portable, etc...

Yup.  Although I have seen some pretty neat things done in (Borland) Pascal.

>IMHO isn't so bad after all. It's useful for writting _small_ programs, and
>maybe for testing algoritms.
>After 6 years of using TP now it is something like... old friend maybe ?  ;)

Heh... I get that feeling when I go back to BC++ 3.1 every now and then (to
test compiler portability).

>Meany techers in AGH high-school (informatics, robotics etc...) still writes
>their programs in... Basic (normal, not Visual)  :)))

Ugh.

>P.S. in what language was Windows 95 written ? I think that most in C / C++,
>right ?

AFAIK, it's C and assembler.  I don't believe they used C++ for it.  OS/2 was C
and asm, so it makes sense that Windows was as well.

-- 
AndrewJ

- Raw text -