PalmOS was also basically a simplified clone of MacOS; I don't know if it was itself written in Pascal, but it kept the same internal Pascal data structures IIRC.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_calling_conventions#stdcal...
Had Java and .NET do the proper thing, by following up on Oberon, Modula-3 and Eiffel, by having proper AOT compilation since day one, and on Java's case value types as well, developers would feel less pressured to turn to C and C++.
Basically if they had been released the same way Go was.
do you also use all the classes of Python or Java's standard library ? C++17's spec is ~1400 pages (http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2017/n471...) but the actual language spec stops at page 406, the remaining 1000 pages are the specifications for the standard library. And in these 400 pages of specs, there are a lot of examples, grammars... just look at the chapter on templates: it's ~80 pages but more than half are valid & invalid code examples.
I don't know half of it half as well as I should like; and
I like less than half of it half as well as it deserves.
-- B.B.
Wirth made a bunch of languages that were based on the "right" way to do things: Pascal, Modula, Modula-2, Oberon. The languages either were used and became massively fragmented (see Pascal) or were not used much. Other than Borland (Turbo Pascal and Delphi) no other large company really embraced any of the Wirth languages.
Stroustrup, on the other hand, was more pragmatic, and released a language aimed at professional programmers. In addition, instead of creating new languages, he has spent decades evolving C++. As a result, C++ has been in the top 5 of most used programming languages for years (decades?) and forms the critical infrastructure of many of the largest tech companies. In addition, I bet the evolution between C with Classes, and C++17 is pretty comparable in scope to that between Pascal and Oberon.