[Info-vax] Fun: Object Pascal on VMS

[Michael S]

On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 12:19:50 -0000 (UTC)
Simon Clubley <clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:

> On 2024-09-06, Dave Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
> > On 9/4/2024 3:29 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:  
> >> On 9/3/2024 10:48 PM, Dave Froble wrote:  
> >>> On 9/3/2024 2:02 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:  
> >>>> On 2024-09-03, Dave Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:  
> >>>>> As for VMS and Pascal, there is a very decent implementation of
> >>>>> that language on
> >>>>> VMS, so what's the problem when a product aimed at a different
> >>>>> environment will not run on every environment.  
> >>>>
> >>>> So how capable are the OO features in VMS Pascal these days ?  
> >>>
> >>> You state that similar to my comment above, as if it is a given
> >>> that OO is necessary.  Perhaps not.  Cheap way to avoid my
> >>> question.  
> >>
> >> If you write OS kernel or an embedded application for a device
> >> counting memory in KB (or maybe a few MB): it is not necessary.  
> >
> > Ok, your word, "necessary".
> >
> > Explain to me why OO is necessary ...
> >
> > Not that it may be useful, or desired.  You wrote "necessary".
> >  
> 
> Because the sheer size of the projects involved require the additional
> abstraction and encapsulation that OO brings to the table.
> 
> There is a reason why Ada, a language designed for building extremely
> large safety-critical systems, added OO features to its second
> iteration and the only debate has been on the syntax, not whether
> those OO features were required.
>

1995. And I suppose that the effort started 2-3 year early, exactly at
the peak of OO hype.

> It's the exact same reason why no-one builds a OS in assembly language
> these days. Technically you "could" do it, but to build something
> viable and robust and in a reasonable amount of time, it is
> "necessary" to use a higher-level language such as C.
> 
> Simon.
>