![]() Turbo Pascal for Windows was released in 1991, the same year as Visual Basic, but it wasn’t all that good, and developers had to wait for version 1.5 in 1993 for a usable platform. Turbo Pascal is still used in DOSBOX in many universities’ software development classes.)īut in the 90s, Windows took off, and Borland took just a little too long to make the transition with its Pascal products. (Pascal as a language was already popular in education before Turbo Pascal UCSD Pascal in particular was fairly popular on some other platforms such as the Apple II. So for a long time Turbo Pascal was the development tool of choice at least for hobbyists and teachers. ![]() Turbo C and then Turbo C++ brought all that to the C side of things on DOS of course, but slightly later. It took a while for other development systems to catch up, and all the while Turbo Pascal was getting better: ever faster, with more units (including Turbo Vision of course), support for programs over 64K, and on the “professional” side, Turbo Profiler, Turbo Debugger, etc. As a result, it was great for hobbyists, where it competed with BASIC, as well as professional developers. When Turbo Pascal was released, it has a number of advantages over the competition, regardless of programming language: it was fast, it produced (reasonably) fast programs, it came with excellent documentation, it included a full development environment with an integrated editor and compiler, it had decent support for the underlying platform (BGI as you point out, although it wasn’t all that good really), and it was cheap ($49.95 at launch, with an extra $100 distribution royalty at first). I think it’s worth looking at the rise of Turbo Pascal (in particular) to understand its “downfall”. The growth in the population of professional C/C++ programmers using PC's would then cement those as the most influential development languages on their new hardware platform. The programmers simply brought their preferred tool - the C Language - with them. So, this long-term trend from workstation to PC hardware moved professional programmers off of their various RISC Unix platforms (Sun, HP, DEC, etc.) and onto x86. The move from workstations to PC's was inevitable because of economies of scale, but it would take all of the 1990's for commodity PC hardware to gain the performance increases needed to make it "respectable" for scientific computing. The C Language, along with the Unix OS, grew to dominate scientific computing at about the same time that PC hardware was taking off and dominating all of mainstream computing. This wasn't so much about what was happening in DOS/PC programming as it was about the slow but steady unification of scientific computing and mainstream/business computing. The following table lists the version number associated with each release of Delphi compilers, beginning with Turbo Pascal 4.0 and ending with the current version of the compiler:ĭelphi 10.4 Sydney / C++Builder 10.4 Sydneyĭelphi 10.2 Tokyo / C++Builder 10.2 Tokyoĭelphi 10.1 Berlin / C++Builder 10.1 Berlinĭelphi 10 Seattle / C++Builder 10 Seattleġ60161 is the version for the five FireMonkey packages at XE2 Update 2: fmi161.bpl, fmx161.bpl, fmxase161.bpl, fmxdae161.bpl, and don't think the answer is very complicated, but the scope and time-frame of the transition was much bigger than you indicate. ![]() Go Up to Conditional compilation (Delphi)
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |