G'Day Geert!

28 Feb 95 16:24, Geert Bosch wrote to Tseard Hoekstra:

 TH>> You are assuming now that everybody is using GCC.

 GB> You certainly misunderstood the point I wanted to make. The
 GB> message I was responding to stated that it was impossible to
 GB> implement OS/2 applications using multiple languages. So I
 GB> provided an example in which it's possible to
 GB> create multi-language applications.

Yes, but GCC is not a viable possibility in commercial environments.

 GB> I'm just trying to show people that
 GB> OS/2 is an open platform that doesn't lock people to a single
 GB> language or compiler. The fact that GCC is a multi-language,
 GB> multi-platform, multi-target compiler is certainly a pro for this
 GB> code generator.

Indeed, OS/2 does not lock people into using a single language/compiler. The
point I was trying to make is that GCC doesn't do the job in a commercial
environment. There are other alternatives. Some decent pascal compilers are on
the market, basic, PL/1, etc. Most of these can be interfaced quite nicely, for
example by writing DLLs with standard PASCAL calling conventions.

 GB> Please let OS/2 continue to be an open environment, with many
 GB> tools and languages to choose from. There's not one solution for
 GB> all needs, and the availability of 'non-C' languages helps in
 GB> making OS/2 more productive for more people.

Amen!

 GB> (PS: Did anybody notice the C++ language specifications change
 GB> nearly as fast as MicroSofts API specs? (This is *not* a flame, I
 GB> just noticed some similarity.)

 Well maybe that is because there is still no C++ standard.....


  Tseard Hoekstra                             If there wasn't a
  Cornerstone Consulting                    last moment nothing
  2:283/713.2                            would ever be finished
  tseard{at}corner.iaf.nl

--- GoldED/2 2.42.G0214