3 ms·

Or, what Jef Raskin would have thought of MacBasic: https://www.folklore.org/MacBasic.html https://www.folklore.org/MacBasic.html Agree w/ the page author's f

Or, what Jef Raskin would have thought of MacBasic: https://www.folklore.org/MacBasic.html https://www.folklore.org/MacBasic.html Agree w/ the page author's fondness for RealBasic --- still have a copy of _BASIC for Windows 3.0_ which had a copy of it on a floppy disk (and a nifty graphical poker game as an example). Xojo is alive and well, though I haven't been able to justify a license, (diverted to HyperCard and Runtime Revolution which became LiveCode until their opensource rug pull) --- probably going to get PureBasic/SpiderBasic for my next project. Are Raskin's criticisms of Pascal addressed in Oberon? Awesome that this page has a running copy, and I'm looking forward to reading the original document. Turning it around --- what programming language now available would best fit Jef Raskin's ideals? Arguably, Python won --- would the Pythonic way of doing things have won him over?

pjmlp 2mo ago
Most Pascal criticisms are already addressed in Modula-2 (1978), that is one of the reasons Niklaus Wirth created it. Pascal was designed for learning, whereas Modula-2 was designed to be an industrial language with support for systems programming. Also note that Apple is actually one of the companies that pushed UCSD Pascal extensions, created Clascal and eventually gave birth to Object Pascal. Which was picked by Borland, and having Object Pascal compilers available at low cost was basically one of the reasons why Modula-2 had a hard time gaining adoption on PC and Apple worlds.