[Oberon] Zonnon

[John Drake]

--- Alan Freed <AlFreed at ohio.net> wrote:

>  John Drake wrote:
> 
> > Well, considering the fact that there's a
> Component
> > Pascal .NET compiler, that doesn't represent much
> of
> > an advantage for Zonnon.  
> 
> The link to the CP.Net compiler is broken on 
> http://www.dotnetpowered.com/languages.aspx
> I don't know anything about this compiler, so I 
> can't respond.

Well here's a working link.

http://plas.fit.qut.edu.au/gpcp/Downloads.aspx
 
> > When Zonnon's predecessor "Lightning Oberon" came
> out, 
> 
> Do you mean "Active Oberon for .net"?
> http://www.oberon.ethz.ch/oberon.net/

Yeah.  At one point they were calling it 
"Lightning Oberon".  See: http://tinyurl.com/oyl9t

> Zonnon is, if you like, Active Oberon for .net-2. 
> It has 
> extensions to the original .net Oberon compiler from
> ETH. 
> It is an industrial grade of Active Oberon for .net.
>  Many,
> but not all, of Zonnon's extensions resulted from
> two 
> sources: 1) to make the language more consistent and
> 
> logical from the viewpoint of its syntax, and 2) to
> make 
> better use of the capabilities that are offered by
> the CLI. 
> 
> > Another hypothetical question.  From what I gather
> > Zonnon supports a version of "Active Objects"
> > similair to Active Oberon.  Is it possible to
> > write a program that compiles under Zonnon and
> > BlueBottle?  That would be interesting.
> 
> I doubt that a typical Active Oberon for .net
> program would 
> compile under BlueBottle, either.  

I don't see why not.  Note, I'm not talking about 
a program that imports "this" feature or "that" 
from a .NET module.  I mean a stand alone module.  
For instance, if I write my own String handling 
module in BlackBox Component Pascal I should be 
able to compile it under Component Pascal .NET 
and vice versa.

> I certainly don't
> expect 
> a Zonnon program to therefore compile under BB
> without 
> modifications. In particular, the syntax Zonnon
> introduces 
> for methods is quite different from its
> predecessors. 

Active Oberon introduces a different syntax also,
but it also retains some of the old.

> This 
> was done to accommodate item 1 above. 
> 
> I'm not trying to convince people to leave Oberon
> based 
> languages for Zonnon.  Each has their strengths and 
> weaknesses, and a programmer must choose based on 
> the demands of their project.  All I'm trying to do
> is make 
> others aware of its existence, and to clarify some
> points 
> made about it earlier.  
> 
> Al

Well, we're aware of it's existence. ;)  I guess
my point is, there are other paths to the .NET
world for Wirthian fans.  I'm sure some changes
in Zonnon may be great improvements (though I've
yet to see specifics) but others seem arbitrary
(like going back to lowercase keywords).  

Hey, I encourage everyone to experiment with
whatever's out there including Zonnon or even
Python for .NET for that matter.

Regards,

John M. Drake

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com