browse words by letter
a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z

pascalmore about pascal

pascal


  4  definitions  found 
 
  From  WordNet  r  1.6  [wn]: 
 
  pascal 
  n  1:  a  unit  of  pressure  equal  to  one  newton  per  square  meter 
  [syn:  {Pa}] 
  2:  French  mathematician  and  philosopher;  invented  an  adding 
  machine;  contributed  (with  Fermat)  to  the  theory  of 
  probability  (1623-1662)  [syn:  {Pascal},  {Blaise  Pascal}] 
  3:  a  programing  language  designed  to  teach  programming  through 
  a  top-down  modular  approach  [syn:  {Pascal}] 
 
  From  Jargon  File  (4.2.3,  23  NOV  2000)  [jargon]: 
 
  Pascal  n.  An  Algol-descended  language  designed  by  Niklaus 
  Wirth  on  the  CDC  6600  around  1967-68  as  an  instructional  tool  for 
  elementary  programming.  This  language,  designed  primarily  to  keep 
  students  from  shooting  themselves  in  the  foot  and  thus  extremely 
  restrictive  from  a  general-purpose-programming  point  of  view,  was  later 
  promoted  as  a  general-purpose  tool  and  in  fact  became  the  ancestor 
  of  a  large  family  of  languages  including  Modula-2  and  {{Ada}}  (see  also 
  {bondage-and-discipline  language}).  The  hackish  point  of  view  on  Pascal 
  was  probably  best  summed  up  by  a  devastating  (and,  in  its  deadpan  way 
  screamingly  funny)  1981  paper  by  Brian  Kernighan  (of  {K&R}  fame)  entitled 
  "Why  Pascal  is  Not  My  Favorite  Programming  Language",  which  was  turned 
  down  by  the  technical  journals  but  circulated  widely  via  photocopies. 
  It  was  eventually  published  in  "Comparing  and  Assessing  Programming 
  Languages",  edited  by  Alan  Feuer  and  Narain  Gehani  (Prentice-Hall,  1984). 
  Part  of  his  discussion  is  worth  repeating  here  because  its  criticisms 
  are  still  apposite  to  Pascal  itself  after  ten  years  of  improvement  and 
  could  also  stand  as  an  indictment  of  many  other  bondage-and-discipline 
  languages.  At  the  end  of  a  summary  of  the  case  against  Pascal, 
  Kernighan  wrote: 
 
  9.  There  is  no  escape 
 
  This  last  point  is  perhaps  the  most  important.  The  language  is 
  inadequate  but  circumscribed,  because  there  is  no  way  to  escape 
  its  limitations.  There  are  no  casts  to  disable  the  type-checking 
  when  necessary.  There  is  no  way  to  replace  the  defective  run-time 
  environment  with  a  sensible  one  unless  one  controls  the  compiler 
  that  defines  the  "standard  procedures".  The  language  is  closed. 
 
  People  who  use  Pascal  for  serious  programming  fall  into  a  fatal  trap. 
  Because  the  language  is  impotent,  it  must  be  extended.  But  each 
  group  extends  Pascal  in  its  own  direction,  to  make  it  look  like 
  whatever  language  they  really  want  Extensions  for  separate 
  compilation,  FORTRAN-like  COMMON,  string  data  types,  internal 
  static  variables,  initialization,  octal  numbers,  bit  operators, 
  etc.,  all  add  to  the  utility  of  the  language  for  one  group  but 
  destroy  its  portability  to  others 
 
  I  feel  that  it  is  a  mistake  to  use  Pascal  for  anything  much  beyond 
  its  original  target.  In  its  pure  form  Pascal  is  a  toy  language, 
  suitable  for  teaching  but  not  for  real  programming. 
 
  Pascal  has  since  been  almost  entirely  displaced  (by  {C})  from  the 
  niches  it  had  acquired  in  serious  applications  and  systems  programming, 
  but  retains  some  popularity  as  a  hobbyist  language  in  the  MS-DOS  and 
  Macintosh  worlds. 
 
 
 
  From  The  Free  On-line  Dictionary  of  Computing  (13  Mar  01)  [foldoc]: 
 
  Pascal 
 
    (After  the  French  mathematician  {Blaise  Pascal} 
  (1623-1662))  A  programming  language  designed  by  {Niklaus 
  Wirth}  around  1970.  Pascal  was  designed  for  simplicity  and 
  for  teaching  programming,  in  reaction  to  the  complexity  of 
  {ALGOL  68}.  It  emphasises  {structured  programming} 
  constructs,  data  structures  and  {strong  typing}.  Innovations 
  included  {enumeration  type}s,  {subrange}s,  sets,  {variant 
  record}s  and  the  {case  statement}.  Pascal  has  been  extremely 
  influential  in  programming  language  design  and  has  a  great 
  number  of  variants  and  descendants. 
 
  ANSI/IEEE770X3.97-1993  is  very  similar  to  {ISO  Pascal}  but 
  does  not  include  {conformant  array}s. 
 
  ISO  7185-1983(E).  Level  0  and  Level  1.  Changes  from  Jensen  & 
  Wirth's  Pascal  include  name  equivalence;  names  must  be  bound 
  before  they  are  used  loop  index  must  be  local  to  the 
  procedure;  formal  procedure  parameters  must  include  their 
  arguments;  {conformant  array  schema}s. 
 
  An  ALGOL-descended  language  designed  by  Niklaus  Wirth  on  the 
  CDC  6600  around  1967--68  as  an  instructional  tool  for 
  elementary  programming.  This  language,  designed  primarily  to 
  keep  students  from  shooting  themselves  in  the  foot  and  thus 
  extremely  restrictive  from  a  general-purpose-programming  point 
  of  view,  was  later  promoted  as  a  general-purpose  tool  and  in 
  fact  became  the  ancestor  of  a  large  family  of  languages 
  including  Modula-2  and  {Ada}  (see  also  {bondage-and-discipline 
  language}).  The  hackish  point  of  view  on  Pascal  was  probably 
  best  summed  up  by  a  devastating  (and,  in  its  deadpan  way 
  screamingly  funny)  1981  paper  by  Brian  Kernighan  (of  {K&R} 
  fame)  entitled  "Why  Pascal  is  Not  My  Favourite  Programming 
  Language",  which  was  turned  down  by  the  technical  journals  but 
  circulated  widely  via  photocopies.  It  was  eventually 
  published  in  "Comparing  and  Assessing  Programming  Languages", 
  edited  by  Alan  Feuer  and  Narain  Gehani  (Prentice-Hall,  1984). 
  Part  of  his  discussion  is  worth  repeating  here  because  its 
  criticisms  are  still  apposite  to  Pascal  itself  after  ten  years 
  of  improvement  and  could  also  stand  as  an  indictment  of  many 
  other  bondage-and-discipline  languages.  At  the  end  of  a 
  summary  of  the  case  against  Pascal,  Kernighan  wrote: 
 
  9.  There  is  no  escape 
 
  This  last  point  is  perhaps  the  most  important.  The  language 
  is  inadequate  but  circumscribed,  because  there  is  no  way  to 
  escape  its  limitations.  There  are  no  casts  to  disable  the 
  type-checking  when  necessary.  There  is  no  way  to  replace  the 
  defective  run-time  environment  with  a  sensible  one  unless  one 
  controls  the  compiler  that  defines  the  "standard  procedures". 
  The  language  is  closed. 
 
  People  who  use  Pascal  for  serious  programming  fall  into  a 
  fatal  trap.  Because  the  language  is  impotent,  it  must  be 
  extended.  But  each  group  extends  Pascal  in  its  own  direction, 
  to  make  it  look  like  whatever  language  they  really  want 
  Extensions  for  separate  compilation,  Fortran-like  COMMON, 
  string  data  types,  internal  static  variables,  initialisation, 
  {octal}  numbers,  bit  operators,  etc.,  all  add  to  the  utility 
  of  the  language  for  one  group  but  destroy  its  portability  to 
  others 
 
  I  feel  that  it  is  a  mistake  to  use  Pascal  for  anything  much 
  beyond  its  original  target.  In  its  pure  form  Pascal  is  a  toy 
  language,  suitable  for  teaching  but  not  for  real  programming. 
 
  Pascal  has  since  been  almost  entirely  displaced  (by  {C})  from 
  the  niches  it  had  acquired  in  serious  applications  and  systems 
  programming,  but  retains  some  popularity  as  a  hobbyist 
  language  in  the  {MS-DOS}  and  {Macintosh}  worlds. 
 
  See  also  {Kamin's  interpreters},  {p2c}. 
 
  ["The  Programming  Language  Pascal",  N.  Wirth,  Acta  Informatica 
  1:35-63,  1971]. 
 
  ["PASCAL  User  Manual  and  Report",  K.  Jensen  &  N.  Wirth, 
  Springer  1975]  made  significant  revisions  to  the  language. 
 
  [BS  6192,  "Specification  for  Computer  Programming  Language 
  Pascal",  {British  Standards  Institute}  1982]. 
 
  [{Jargon  File}] 
 
  (1996-06-12) 
 
 
 
  From  The  Free  On-line  Dictionary  of  Computing  (13  Mar  01)  [foldoc]: 
 
  Pascal- 
 
  Pascal  subset  used  in  Brinch  Hansen  on  Pascal  Compilers,  P. 
  Brinch  Hansen,  P-H  1985. 
 
  [{Jargon  File}] 
 
 




more about pascal