I was truly disappointed that Turbo Pascal did not copy my handy PORT-metavariable. You can write & read IO-ports without any extra hässle:
Turbo Pascal on CP/M, MSX-DOS and MS-DOS
31–40 of 55 posts
Re: Turbo Pascal on CP/M, MSX-DOS and MS-DOS
#32Re: Turbo Pascal on CP/M, MSX-DOS and MS-DOS
#33I wish someone will just use Claude Code and generate an equivalent of Delphi 7 for Linux, MacOSX and Windows.
Re: Turbo Pascal on CP/M, MSX-DOS and MS-DOS
#34Re: Turbo Pascal on CP/M, MSX-DOS and MS-DOS
#35Is it right to say that Borland basically invented the IDE? I didn't use Turbo Pascal but did have a copy of Turbo C back in the day and that was certainly the first IDE-like programming environment I can remember.
Moreover, interpreters that offered a complete interactive environment for editing, running and debugging programs, had existed for decades for languages like APL and LISP.
Nonetheless, the availability of Turbo Pascal on cheap computers has probably introduced much more people to such a programming environment than the older alternatives, which were available only on big and expensive computers, so at most they were accessible through time-sharing services in big companies or in universities.
I have used Turbo Pascal on 8080- and Z80-based computers running the CP/M operating system, before becoming able to use IBM PC compatibles, where the Microsoft and Borland C and C++ compilers were a better alternative, and it was a good progress over what I had used previously, but before that, in the university I had used a "Remote Job Entry" system which accessed by time-sharing a computer mainframe from a serial video terminal, and you could do with it everything that you could do with Turbo Pascal (for programs written in Fortran), except that its source code editor was far more awkward (it was a line-oriented text editor, where you could see the source code, but to edit a line it was extracted into a buffer at the bottom of the screen and merged back into the source code when editing it was complete).
On CP/M, Turbo Pascal was the most convenient programming environment, but for serious work, where run-time performance mattered, I was using the Microsoft Fortran compiler for CP/M, enhanced by replacing a few of the subroutines from its run-time library with optimized variants. Pascal is really much too weak for number-crunching problems, even if it may be acceptable for non-numeric problems that are not too complex (the original Pascal does not support multi-file programs, Turbo Pascal was extended in a non-standard way to support this).
Re: Turbo Pascal on CP/M, MSX-DOS and MS-DOS
#36I wrote Pascal for 8080 in 1976 and Finnish Army even paid some money for it. I was truly disappointed that Turbo Pascal did not copy my handy PORT-metavariable. You can write & read IO-ports without any extra hässle: https://photos.app.goo.gl/qeJpYb94XzLBCE139
Here is the first function of your example in TP3: procedure DataOut; begin while (Port[$f5] and 1) = 0 do; port[$f4] := Data; end,
Re: Turbo Pascal on CP/M, MSX-DOS and MS-DOS
#37I wrote Pascal for 8080 in 1976 and Finnish Army even paid some money for it. I was truly disappointed that Turbo Pascal did not copy my handy PORT-metavariable. You can write & read IO-ports without any extra hässle: https://photos.app.goo.gl/qeJpYb94XzLBCE139
Turbo Pascal supported port array though: https://archive.org/details/bitsavers_borlandturVersion3.0Re... Here is the first function of your example in TP3: procedure DataOut; begin while (Port[$f5] and 1) = 0 do; port[$f4] := Data; end,
Originally you had to write inline assembly.
Re: Turbo Pascal on CP/M, MSX-DOS and MS-DOS
#38I purchased Turbo Pascal 3 for Amstrad CPC 6128 with my pocket money back in 1989(?). That was 1000 FF back then (~275€ today) so quite a big sum for a teenager. My dad took pity on me and funded 50% of it. Best investment ever! Learning Pascal after Locomotive Basic was night and day. And the speeeeeed! I could finally compute 320x200 Mandelbrot set renderings in reasonable amounts of time (few minutes IIRC). I stil…
The TP versions started with 3.0, up to 6.0, naturally later versions had to be customised to fit into the floppy.
I used to carry it around for the school computers.
However that is another level given CPC limitations.
Re: Turbo Pascal on CP/M, MSX-DOS and MS-DOS
#39Small machines eh? How about a Casio PB-2000C, in all its pocketable 910 kHz glory, up to 64k RAM shared between heap, stack, code and RAM filesystem. 192 x 32 LCD and a piezo buzzer. Serial and parallel ports available and a FDD. It also has a ROM card slot. And a card was developed, the only third-party ROM for this platform, by one Hans Larsson in Sweden, in the late 1980s. A 64k ROM with: - a mostly TP 5.5 compat…
However it was always BASIC in the models we had access to.
Re: Turbo Pascal on CP/M, MSX-DOS and MS-DOS
#40Is it right to say that Borland basically invented the IDE? I didn't use Turbo Pascal but did have a copy of Turbo C back in the day and that was certainly the first IDE-like programming environment I can remember.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Star
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Development_Environment
IDEs go back to how Mesa (Tajo), Interlisp-D and Smalltalk work.
Here are some overview papers
"The Mesa programming environment"
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/800225.806843
Interlisp-D, you can see all on the recovery project
And naturally the famous Smalltalk issue on Byte,
https://archive.org/details/byte-magazine-1981-08
Turbo Pascal naturally did what was possible on home computers hardware, the iconic 3.0 version that made it take off was released in 1985.