Date   : Mon, 20 Apr 1987107:43:00-MDT
From   : hrcca!bobc@HARVARD.HARVARD.EDU
Subject: Modula2

Do you think Modula-2 will be a successful language in the Micro
world?  I recently purchased Turbo Modula-2 from Echelon, and have
mixed feelings about the language.  Although I don't think there is
any question that straight M2 is a better language than straight
Pascal, most M2 enhancements were already incorporated into Turbo
Pascal (and other successful implementations of Pascal I believe).
Indeed, I think that Wirth liked certain features of Turbo Pascal and
'C' language, borrowed them to rewrite Pascal, and named the result
Modula-2.

On the negative aspects of M2:

 1.  The explicit IMPORT of every identifier that I want to
     use drives me crazy.  It wouldn't be so bad if there
     were only 2 or 3 modules to import from, but there are
     so many!! I'll never complain about
     #include <stdio.h> again.

 2.  The lack of a general purpose output procedure (e.g.:
     Pascal's WRITE/WRITELN or C's printf() ) makes output
     routines a nightmare.  Using 4-5 procedure calls to
     write 1 line to the console is a pain.

 3.  Linking in entire modules rather than individual
     procedures (which I took the bother of identifying
     with IMPORTs) leads to large object code. This may
     just be a problem with Borland's linker though and not
     inherent to the language.

I would be interested in the comments that you or any of your
associates may have on this matter.

          Sincerely,

          Bob Kemp