Adriaan van Os wrote:
Gale Paeper wrote:
Emil Jerabek wrote:
Before you start worrying about supporting this feature: I've never worked with Macs, I was just inferring from the description of `Interactive' posted by Adriaan.
Just to clear up a potential misunderstanding - Adriaan's postings in this thread is discussing the Apple UCSD Pascal compiler for the Apple II line of computers. For the Macintosh line of computers, a different Apple Pascal compiler (MPW Pascal) was used. Although the MPW Pascal language dialect supported some legacy Apple UCSD Pascal features, all but one of the 17 Apple UCSD Pascal items Adriaan posted a while back were pretty much completely unsupported. (The one that unaltered support continued on was the standard Pascal Page procedure.)
[snip]
By the way, what is a "legacy" feature ?
I don't know about other folks, but the definition for legacy that I use is the same one commonly found in English language dictionaries. A legacy feature is nothing more than a feature which was also present in a previous generation.
Who issues the verdict and on what grounds ? Common opinion ?
No opinion involved. Assuming, of course, there is sufficient factual evidence available to determine when the feature first occurred and what the ancestory relationship is.
Some people, mostly not those with much technical skill, refer to Pascal itself as a "legacy" language ... We have to judge features, algorithms languages and design in general on merits, not on prejudice.
Just because some folks always use legacy as a negative epithet doesn't mean it always is a negative epithet. Unless the nuances of context indictates it is being used in a negative epithetical sense, the word legacy describes nothing more than an ancestral relationship.
Gale Paeper gpaeper@empirenet.com