News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Photoshop 1.0 Source Code. Parent comment

Re:Photoshop 1.0 Source Code by pjmlp on Thursday February 14, 2013 @03:55AM (#5218525)
Pascal is modern.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Photoshop 1.0 Source Code by raverbashing on Thursday February 14, 2013 @04:03AM (#5218548)
At an older company that ran (old) Pascal code in production systems, the race was on to find a supported pascal compiler nowadays.

But that's not possible, so the port to C had been started.

(Oh but Delphi - this systems are not Windows)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Photoshop 1.0 Source Code by pjmlp on Thursday February 14, 2013 @04:31AM (#5218654)
What about FreePascal?

I do recognize that Pascal sadly was never strong on UNIX/Mainframe systems, which I imagine is your case.

My move from Turbo Pascal/Delphi to C and C++ happened around the time I needed to target UNIX systems. Given the choice I always take C++ over C, because I can achieve a Pascal like safety.

But I do miss coding Delphi.

If Sun hadn't pushed Java so hard and Borland didn't went schizophrenic with what to do with their products, Delphi would probably still be quite strong nowadays.

Still the best way to code native applications on Windows though.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Photoshop 1.0 Source Code by raverbashing on Thursday February 14, 2013 @05:43AM (#5218851)
The key is 'supported'. As in "we are willing to pay money to have someone fix if this breaks"

Not sure they looked into FreePascal (and it is a couple of years already)

About C vs C++, I agree

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Photoshop 1.0 Source Code by pjmlp on Thursday February 14, 2013 @05:55AM (#5218882)
> The key is 'supported'. As in "we are willing to pay money to have someone fix if this breaks"

Fair enough. Thanks for pointing it out.

[ Parent | on HN ]