Talk:Comparison of Pascal and Delphi

heading

Hi, I started this page. It contains just the basic facts about what the differences are between Borland Delphi and the original language as proposed by Niklaus Wirth.

--Pascalman 20:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

factual?

This is not an article. Its a series of made up "facts". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.87.19.210 (talk) 01:20, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Comments

The article needs work. The main thing is that sections shouldn't be a "question and answer". Bubba73 (talk), 22:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Spelling error 'Comparision' in the article title - I would have changed it if I knew how to. Chris Burrows (talk) 02:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I fixed it by moving the article. Bubba73 (talk), 02:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Get rid of the second person use. Bubba73 (talk), 02:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

It needs to be less instructional, particularly the sections about making a program compatible with different dialects. I.e, Don't say " you should do ...", but tell what should be done or has to be done. (Third person passive voice). Bubba73 (talk), 04:53, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

How similar are ISO 7185 and Niklaus Wirth's original specification? Are they essentially the same? Bubba73 (talk), 02:23, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

See John Reagan's FAQ: http://www.pascal-central.com/extpascal.html Chris Burrows (talk) 03:30, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

There is a more complete comparison here: http://www.standardpascal.com/pascalfaq.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.198.58 (talk) 00:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Eliminate first person too : "I have seen...". Bubba73 (talk), 21:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

In some cases the article needs to say which is which. i.e., "The functions "pack" and "unpack" are not implemented." - they are not implemented in Delphi. Similarly, Goto can not reference outside its proc in Delphi. Bubba73 (talk), 02:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Is it possible sections

First, I do not like the style of the three "is it bossible" sections - they shouldn't be question and answer. Secondly, I have concerns as to whether or not they belong in an article comparing the two versions of Pascal. Bubba73 (talk), 01:08, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

we'll look forward to your rewrite. What specifically is not relevant to the subject at hand? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.198.58 (talk) 22:57, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not going to rewrite them. If you want me to edit them then I will delete them as being non-encyclopedic in tone. Bubba73 (talk), 00:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

In particular, see WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, or textbook. Bubba73 (talk), 00:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not going to rewrite them either. What you appear to be interested in is complaining that others should be doing work. If you don't like it, but aren't willing to do anything about it, that does not equal it needs to be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.28.253.185 (talk) 00:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I think that the article shou;d adhere to the policies of Wikipedia, which those sections don't. I'm giving someone a chance to fix them, or they will probably get deleted. I've made 15,000 edits to Wikipedia. I'm not going to fix someone else's errors on this. I'll delete them if need be. And if those are gone, then I'd say that section 2 should be merged into Borland Pascal and the article deleted. Bubba73 (talk), 00:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Improved the introductory paragraph a bit, hopefully explaining where Delphi exactly derives from. 88.159.64.210 (talk) 13:09, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Comparison of Pascal and Delphi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050314152247/http://www.cs.inf.ethz.ch/~wirth/books/Pascal/ to http://www.cs.inf.ethz.ch/~wirth/books/Pascal/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:35, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Obvious bias

This article, which may or may not need to even exist (WP:N) is laughably biased. It's clearly written by someone who doesn't like Delphi and prefers Standard Pascal. It's basically a list of all the things that you can't do in Delphi that you can do in Pascal, with more or less no citations. This isn't a comparison as much as just bashing Delphi. I've never actually written a line of code in either language, so I have no horse in this race, but as an outsider it struck me as fairly obvious how biased the writer is. Perhaps either turn this into an actual comparison between the two languages (if that's even really necessary as an article on Wikipedia -- some of these points or comparisons could just be made on the Delphi page) or nominate it for deletion. MrAureliusR_Talk! 03:31, 23 April 2023 (UTC)