"da Silva, Joe" wrote:
... snip ...
What do you consider "Standard"??? As far as I'm concerned, ISO-10206 is the standard to which GPC aspires, so why should GPC regard the above as an error, when this is clearly permitted by ISO-10206. IMHO, ISO-7185 should not be regarded as if it's the one and only Pascal standard. Prospero call this version of the language "Classic Pascal", to distinguish it from "Extended Pascal". I like that idea. I don't think it helps Pascal's image to always refer to ISO-7185 as THE Pascal standard, since this gives the impression of a very restricted and limited language, which is not something that Pascal deserves. I think we should promote the ISO-10206 standard, not pretend there is only one Pascal standard. (Rant over ;-)
What is ISO-10206, and where is it available?
At the same time, GPC should be able to check various portability levels. If the source conforms to a standard, it is compilable under systems that support that standard. If we can't tell it conforms, we can't very well put a stamp on it.