J. David Bryan wrote:
On 16 Oct 2001, at 14:54, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
[Joe da Silva]
What do you consider "Standard"???
[...]
Well, in theory I'd agree, but the terminology that's been used in GPC for a long time is to call ISO-7185 "Standard Pascal" and ISO-10206 "Extended Pascal".
I confess that I missed Joe's point entirely. Now I understand that he meant that "--standard-pascal" should really be named "--pascal" (i.e., the "standard" part is misleading).
Perhaps "--iso-pascal" and "--iso-extended-pascal" would have been better choices for the compiler switches.
I don't see a big difference between `--standard-pascal' and `--iso-pascal' (EP is also ISO). So if anything, I'd tend to `--classic-pascal' or so.
I'm not sure if it's worth the trouble to rename things (including, e.g., the option `--standard-pascal') now....
The "trouble" would be minimal, no? Just some string changes?
I haven't checked how many it would be. For consistency, those internal GPC variables and constants that refer to it should also be renamed, and that's quite a few.
And every user who uses the option would have to change it ...
Frank