|
|
|
|
|
by pjmlp
921 days ago
|
|
Pascal naysayers are those stuck in Pascal 1.0 for anything related to C vs Pascal. That optional extension became part of the ISO Extended Pascal revision, for example. To make it clear should we compare Go's ability to write generic code versus other languages, using 1.21 or 1.0 version? |
|
There is also the problem of not being able to define local variables (e.g. to hold the result of intermediate computations) right there and then. Even in Delphi until very recently, you have / had to declare each single local variable above the function body, below the function signature, _before assignment_. That is worse than C89 declaration style like used in Linux until recently (may be ongoing. I've dealt enough with that code to say that it's often a pain to have a lot of variables around that don't hold valid values.
So we already have two significant defects that produce friction in basic use. It feels like Duplo, not Lego, because important basic usecases require so much verbosity that it becomes cumbersomse to read and write. And I assume that is a big reason why the language has seen less adoption / has even lost adoption where it had already gotten some.
Some aspects of the Borland compilers (like performance) are genuinely nice though. And that it is in no small part due to the language structure enabling them.