Pascal to C (and vice versa)

[Norman Diamond]

In article <20355 at mimsy.umd.edu> chris at mimsy.umd.edu (Chris Torek) writes:

>It is worth noting that [a program using SET OF CHAR] is not standard
>Pascal (unless, as
>is not too terribly unlikely, I have missed something that happened
>recently in Pascal standards).  Pascal sets are limited to some small
>number of possible members.  Some (many/most/almost-all) implementations
>allow larger sets (such as `set of char'), but the standard requires
>only a small number of elements per set.

Just like any C program that contains more than one function-like macro
is not standard C, eh?  Yes, there can be compilers which meet the
letter but not the spirit of the standard, and usually such compilers
fail in the market-place.  All languages are alike in this respect.

Incidentally, the Extended Pascal standard also does not require support
for SET OF CHAR.  If the character set is ASCII or an ISO set of up to
256 characters, then everyone expects that compilers will accept SET OF
CHAR and everyone uses it.  However, if the character set is multibyte,
then SET OF CHAR might be a bit demanding.  So the standard did not
require it.  The market-place still demands sensibility, just as in C.

-- 
Norman Diamond, Sony Corp. (diamond%ws.sony.junet at uunet.uu.net seems to work)
  Should the preceding opinions be caught or     |  James Bond asked his
  killed, the sender will disavow all knowledge  |  ATT rep for a source
  of their activities or whereabouts.            |  licence to "kill".