[Oberon] Oberon-1 or Oberon-2?
informujo at aon.at
Fri Oct 17 18:52:17 CEST 2014
On 10/14/14 03:48, skulski at pas.rochester.edu wrote:
> experiments of our times.) Based on this experience I believe that
> Oberon-2 helps with writing better, more reliable code. It is a pity that
> Oberon-2 is not available under the FPGA Oberon System. Perhaps it was
> more convenient to do so, but I think it was a mistake.
Approximately 20 years ago, I heard a guest lecture of Prof. Wirth at
the University of Linz, in which he shortly talked about Oberon-2. If
I remember correctly, he did like the reintroduction of the FOR
statement. He also liked the possibility to export variables and
record components for read-only access (with the "-" sign instead of
"*"), although he would have made this the default. He did not like
type-bound procedures, saying that they were some kind of constant
record components and that procedure variables should be used instead.
Therefore, I think Oberon on the FPGA is the way it is not because of
convenience but because that's how Wirth wanted it to be.
More information about the Oberon