From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu From: erik quanstrom Message-Id: <20011213173843.5E5683FE56@quanstro.net> Subject: [9fans] pascal, TeX Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:38:43 -0500 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 35307f20-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 i think knuth is the counterexample that proves the point. knuth lives on his own planet. i believe it's called "the art of computer programming." ;-) also, due TeX's pascal heratage, it has an ungodly number of compiled-in limits. i haven't looked carefully for a long time, but it seems that the maintainers have just made the limits really big or changed the code in some way. in the day (working on 780s) it was always fun to recompile TeX to finish a document (because you'd blown some limit you'd never heard of before). not to start a flameware (troff esentially has the same problem), but TeX is a great education in Why To Hate Macro Processors. sendmail does better, but at least with TeX you can get something useful done at the same time. erik Douglas A. Gwyn wrote: > "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" wrote: >> "Douglas A. Gwyn" writes: >> > D De Villiers wrote: >> > > No Pascal implementation ? Pascal compiler etc etc ? >> > Why? What use would it be? >> It would let you run Pascal programs. > And what use would *that* be? > Seriously, are there any major apps written in Pascal? TEX was.