THINK PASCAL VS TURBO PASCAL. 
Author Message
 THINK PASCAL VS TURBO PASCAL.

Greetings,
               After seeing Think Pascal for the Macintosh, which ressembled
quite closely the syntax used in Turbo Pascal, I wanted to know if the DOS
version of Think Pascal is similar to Turbo Pascal, and if so does it include
a GUI (just like TVision) and a source code converter?

Since borland Pascal is dead, i am considering switching to think pascal if it
is worth it.

Carl Eric Codere aka Black One.


http://www.*-*-*.com/
<Electrical Engineering, University of Sherbrooke>



Wed, 18 Jun 1902 08:00:00 GMT  
 THINK PASCAL VS TURBO PASCAL.

Quote:

>Greetings,
>               After seeing Think Pascal for the Macintosh, which ressembled
>quite closely the syntax used in Turbo Pascal, I wanted to know if the DOS
>version of Think Pascal is similar to Turbo Pascal, and if so does it include
>a GUI (just like TVision) and a source code converter?
>Since borland Pascal is dead, i am considering switching to think pascal if it
>is worth it.

1)  I personally think that Borland Pascal is not "dead".  I use it
quite often, along with Borland C++.
2)  I have worked with Think Pascal also, I DON'T LIKE IT.  With OOP
programming, (especially with the Mac), is a complete waste of time.
The source code for a basic generic window on the Mac with Think
Pascal will not even fit on a high density (1.44 MB) disk.
3)  Mac sucks

Note:  THIS IS NOT A FLAME.  These are merely my own oppinions.
(****************************************)
(*Tom Cornett                           *)
(*http://www.leba.net/~tcornett         *)

(****************************************)



Wed, 18 Jun 1902 08:00:00 GMT  
 THINK PASCAL VS TURBO PASCAL.

Quote:


>>Greetings,
>>               After seeing Think Pascal for the Macintosh, which ressembled
>>quite closely the syntax used in Turbo Pascal, I wanted to know if the DOS
>>version of Think Pascal is similar to Turbo Pascal, and if so does it include
>>a GUI (just like TVision) and a source code converter?

There is no DOS version of Think Pascal.

Quote:
>>Since borland Pascal is dead, i am considering switching to think pascal
>>if it is worth it.
> 1)  I personally think that Borland Pascal is not "dead".  I use it
> quite often, along with Borland C++.
> 2)  I have worked with Think Pascal also, I DON'T LIKE IT.  With OOP
> programming, (especially with the Mac), is a complete waste of time.
> The source code for a basic generic window on the Mac with Think
> Pascal will not even fit on a high density (1.44 MB) disk.

You don't seem to know where you are talking about. Think Pascal implements
standard Object Pascal (instead of the Borland variant). Using the (ROM-based)
Macintosh Toolbox you can write a hello-world windowed program in a few tens
of lines. It compiles to less than 5 K of code. With TCL (a class library),
you need a similar amount of lines, but have much more functionality and a
larger memory footprint.
  The major advantage of Think vs Borland Pascal is the de{*filter*}. In short,
it works.

Quote:
> 3)  Mac sucks

Dream on.

  Stephan



Wed, 18 Jun 1902 08:00:00 GMT  
 THINK PASCAL VS TURBO PASCAL.

Quote:

> Think Pascal implements
> standard Object Pascal (instead of the Borland variant).

I didn't know there was such a thing as standard Object Pascal. What
other compilers except for Think Pascal support it? Any for DOS (I can
dream can't I)?

--
                 Fredrik Arnerup


       url: http://www.nada.kth.se/~md95-far/

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS d- s:- a--- C++(+++) US P+ L(+) E W+++ N+++ o? K? w---()
O- M-- V? PS+ PE? Y PGP-
t+>++ 5- X- !R- tv b++ DI+++>++++ D+ G e- h*! r? y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------



Wed, 18 Jun 1902 08:00:00 GMT  
 THINK PASCAL VS TURBO PASCAL.

Quote:

>> Think Pascal implements
>> standard Object Pascal (instead of the Borland variant).
>I didn't know there was such a thing as standard Object Pascal. What
>other compilers except for Think Pascal support it? Any for DOS (I can
>dream can't I)?

Sorry, I was misunderstood, I meant to say that the syntax of think pascal and
borland pascal are quite similar in some aspects but different in others...
!!!

There is no such thing as i know of a standard object pascal

Carl Eric Codere aka Black One.


http://www-edu.gel.usherb.ca/codc01
<Electrical Engineering, University of Sherbrooke>



Wed, 18 Jun 1902 08:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 5 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. free pascal vs turbo pascal - range checking

2. free pascal vs turbo pascal - range checking

3. Turbo Pascal vs ANSI Pascal

4. Borland Turbo Pascal vs Pascal with Objects

5. Turbo Pascal 7.0 vs Borland Pascal 7.0

6. Turbo vs. Think

7. Turbo Pascal 7.0 vs Turbo C++ 3.1

8. DOS Turbo Pascal .vs. Windows 98

9. Turbo vs. VAX Pascal

10. Turbo vs. VAX Pascal

11. turbo pascal vs delphi

12. Turbo Pascal 7 or Educational Turbo Pascal 7

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software