Delphi 2007 Handbook




Essential Pascal




social web book








May 21, 2007

Jeff Duntemann on the Pascal Language

I found an interesting post by an old friend... of Turbo Pascal and Delphi.

In a recent blog post, Jeff Duntemann, author, editor, and publisher of countless books, articles, and magazines on Turbo Pascal and Delphi, writes about the Pascal language. A sarcastic comment of him on "that never-to-be-sufficiently-despised language Pascal" triggered a few complains, to which Jeff replied with another post, A Failure of Sarcasm. He talks about his "grudge against the dorks and flamers who waged war on my kiddie language" , complains that the "vast majority of buffer overflow exploits tormenting us these days can be traced to the unbounded string functions in the standard C library", and ends by stating that "in the realm of high-level languages, I have only one love, per omnia saecula saeculorum".

I used to subscribe to all of Jeff's magazines, from the early days of Turbo Techniques to Visual Developer, and I still have lots of copies on my shelves. I have many of Jeff's books. And he keeps proving to be a smart writer on technical stuff. By the way, in the same entry Jeff suggests CodeGear to work on Turbo Erlang. Interesting point. Better handling of parallel computing in one of the next big things. Now if I could have a "parallel Delphi"...





 

3 Comments

Jeff Duntemann on the Pascal Language 

 I my opinion there would be a lot of ideas how Pascal
could be developed and evolved.

It is certainly not about stealing ideas from other
languages, but its more about learning from
experimental and commercial languages.

Why not look into the recent buzz of dynamic
languages? What is it that makes it interesting? Is
there something that would improve productivity
without losing the "charm" of Pascal?

What about functional languages? (Have you looked at
F# yet?) What about lambda expressions - and make them
available in Pascal with an *easy* to use syntax?

Just some thoughts ...
Comment by Olaf Monien [http://blogs.atozed.com] on May 22, 00:27

Jeff Duntemann on the Pascal Language 

"Why not look into the recent buzz of dynamic"

Because Pascal is not dynamic? Introducing those 
features in a compiled language could be very 
difficult - if not impossible - or 
counterproductive. And not everybody is coding 
websites.

"What about functional languages?"

IMHO functional languages have yet to demonstrate 
they could be "general purpose" languages and 
not "specific-tasks" ones.
Comment by Tied user on May 22, 12:58

Jeff Duntemann on the Pascal Language 

"IMHO functional languages have yet to demonstrate 
they could be "general purpose" languages and 
not "specific-tasks" ones."

I believe the same can be said about any imperative 
language. (In the sense that an imperative approach 
isn't always the best approach to a problem).

Take a look at VB 9 and 10, C# 3 (and likely Java 7), 
you'll find that these mainstream languages are 
borrowing heavily from functional languages.

I suspect the reason that many people like a dynamic 
language like Ruby isn't because the language is 
dynamic, but because it borrows some nice ideas from 
functional languages (and with a syntax many find 
comfortable).

For a much more interesting (and well designed) 
language than Ruby, PHP etc, take a look at Scala, a 
statically typed language:
http://www.scala-lang.org/

To quote Doug Pardee about Scala:
"Just what the world needs… but doesn’t want: a 
carefully designed statically typed programming 
language."
Comment by Jarle Stabell on May 22, 23:40


Post Your Comment

Click here for posting your feedback to this blog.

There are currently 0 pending (unapproved) messages.