On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, John L. Ries wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, John Ollason wrote:
My main reason for asking the question was to try to find
out if there
would be any interest in a modern primer, based on GPC,
as an introduction
to scientific programming. Years ago, with a colleague,
we talked of
writing a book entitled 'Brute force programming' which
was designed for
scientists.
One very important group of users are those who need to maintain legacy code. I have a mix of programs written in C, C++, VMS and HP Pascals, and Fortran 77, in some cases written 20 years or more ago. I converted the whole lot to Python modules. The result: A huge improvement in usability, as I can use all these modules from simple scripts. I can now do many things easily that were previously too awkward and time-consuming to contemplate. Furthermore, the use of GCC compilers will help portability. Users of these modules need only know one language - Python (which is an Algol family language).
I think that Pascal is still one of the better compiled languages. For someone who wants to write GUI applications on Windows, Delphi is a good choice because of features such as the form designer. But things have moved on: Powerful dynamic scripting languages such as Python contain a lot of new thinking, and really do save time in many applications (e.g. data processing). There is a good case for writing core functions (e.g. maths) in a compiled standardised language such as Pascal or extended Pascal, which will be around for decades, then writing interfaces to scripting languages as required. Unfortunately, to interface Python and gpc, you have to go via C, so for new code it's tempting just to use C.
I suspect that many of the Pascal books are now out of print. I once used "Pascal Programs for Engineers and Scientists", author Alan R Miller, published in 1985. I don't think that I'm qualified to say how big a market there would be for the proposed new book.
Although I don't contribute much to this list either, I would like to say thank you to the maintainers of gpc for improving it and keeping it up to date with GCC.
Andrew Gregory.
------------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged material; it is for the intended addressee(s) only. If you are not a named addressee, you must not use, retain or disclose such information.
NPL Management Ltd cannot guarantee that the e-mail or any attachments are free from viruses.
NPL Management Ltd. Registered in England and Wales. No: 2937881 Registered Office: Serco House, 16 Bartley Wood Business Park, Hook, Hampshire RG27 9UY United Kingdom -------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Gregory wrote:
I think that Pascal is still one of the better compiled languages. For someone who wants to write GUI applications on Windows, Delphi is a good choice because of features such as the form designer. But things have moved on: Powerful dynamic scripting languages such as Python contain a lot of new thinking, and really do save time in many applications (e.g. data processing). There is a good case for writing core functions (e.g. maths) in a compiled standardised language such as Pascal or extended Pascal, which will be around for decades, then writing interfaces to scripting languages as required. Unfortunately, to interface Python and gpc, you have to go via C, so for new code it's tempting just to use C.
But what does "go via C" actually mean? I remember a joint project I did with a C++ programmer. We also "went via C" which means he wrote `extern "C"' and I wrote `external name' etc. No actual C code was involved (apart from the GMP library which is written in C (and assembler) and was used by both Pascal and C++ parts of the program). So "going via C" doesn't have to mean more than using a simple (i.e., only types available in C, no schemata, templates or objects etc.) and well-defined (no name-mangling) calling interface.
Frank
-
Andrew Gregory -
Frank Heckenbach