Frank Heckenbach wrote:
da Silva, Joe wrote:
On the subject of missing "output" as a program parameter, or in the more general case, where the program header has no parameters at all (assuming of course "input" and "output" are neither explicitly nor implicitly used), Peter Grogono (in his book 'Programming in Pascal') says words to the effect of :
It is legal to omit the parameters from the program header, provided neither "input" or "output" is used, however, a program which provides no input or output is generally not very useful.
I was going to say that it can input/output via files etc., but given that all files that are not mentioned in the header are internal and their contents will be gone after the program terminates, and ISO-7185 doesn't provide any other way of doing I/O, it seems indeed that such a program couldn't do much more than wasting some CPU time.
So, should we leave the warning (because it's pointless to write such a program)?
The above has an element of humour in it, but makes it quite clear that it is perfectly legal to omit "input" and/or "output" from the program header if these are not used. Note that the above is not an exact quote, just from memory, however, I could spend a bit of time to locate the exact text, if required.
Now that you said it, ISTR having read this somewhere, too ...
"Classic" is a perfect description of ISO-7185 (thanks, Prospero), since it corresponds exactly (well, with just one change, suggested by Wirth) to the language originally defined in the 'User Manual and Report' published by Jensen and Wirth, in 1974.What is this one change, BTW?
Conformant arrays. Also some tightening up. The existance of any change was a big battle between the US and the world, circa 1980, resulting in level 0 and level 1 as a compromise. OTHERWISE was in the earlier drafts too.