Talk:Oberon-2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article may be too technical for a general audience. Please help improve this article by providing more context and better explanations of technical details to make it more accessible, without removing technical details. |
The source of information for the summary of extensions is Differences between Oberon and Oberon-2 by Hanspeter Mössenböck and Niklaus Wirth
Chris Burrows 14:24, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
Niklaus Wirth's languages have very striking differences, hidden among their similarities. Almost Introvert/extrovert. For example Algol could talk to any other language, and be mixed in to build a product, an extrovert. Pascal in it's native form would have to be recompiled to point to a different file, an introvert. Modula II was out there again. Interfacing other languages. It was a great language for real world problems. Definitely an extrovert. Oberon (an Oberon-2) have their own environment again. They don't want to touch the real world. And although they are nicely written languages, they are not good for much beyond teaching. A major introvert.
So Niklaus has had plenty of time to write yet another extrovert language, but I am not seeing anything out there.
Anonymous 14:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
-- Funny analysis :-). To me, the main characteristic of Wirth's languages are the warts :-P (not by evolution, but on purpose... i cannot understand that...). For example: Oberon has operators "&" and "OR". Why the former is a symbol and the latter is a word? This looks stupid (and i'm inclined to think that it is stupid). And Pascal had the wrong precedence for "and" and "or", which forced you to always use parenthesis (among other annoyances). I could never find a rationale for those decisions. -- unsigned
[edit] I disagree
No, that's not right. Oberon-2 is one of my favourite languages simply because it IS useful for things beside teaching. Remember, the Obeon-2 compiler and operating system were written in Oberon-2, so it can certainly claim a place as a systems programming language. Oberon is a bigger better Pascal, and Pascal has been used for a great many real-world applications, including (until recently) the user interface system at the London Stock Exchange.
OrangUtanUK 13:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Code examples
Does anyone mind if I make the code examples a bit clearer? Most of them don't do anything when they run, and some of them don't even compile cleanly.
Neuralwarp (talk) 12:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- Good idea. I'm not too worried about the ListClass example as anybody who would be able to understand the additional details could fill in the blanks anyway. However the 'birds' example surely could be replaced with something more realistic. Shapes (rectangles, squares, circles) and their areas perhaps? However, this is an encyclopaedia so again, just a skeleton illustrating the main issues is sufficient. Examples should include valid declarations statements, expressions etc. but it is not necessary (or advisable) to include complete compilable working examples.
- Chris Burrows (talk) 01:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, good. Yes, I agree. Code examples in a dictionary should be primarily (a) understandable - hence short, (b) useful - hence showing a range of language elements, and (c) correct. My concern about compilability relates to the third point.
I think it would be best to take fragments of code from the papers and key reference books, where possible.
Neuralwarp (talk) 16:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
