Talk:Modula-2

Is Oberon-2 the latest of Wrth's languages ? AFAIR it grown into Oberon/F aka Component Pascal

--

What do you mean by Wirth's languages - ones that he has designed or ones that he has inspired? If it is the latter, Zonnon is probably the latest.

The language Component Pascal, formerly known as Oberon/L (Oberon/F is actually the framework now known as BlackBox) is a product of Oberon Microsystems Inc. who are credited as being the authors of the CP language report. Although Wirth is a director of the company, I don't believe that he was responsible for conceiving the language extensions. I think that was more likely the work of Beat Heeb, Cuno Pfister, Clemens Szyperski et al.

Chris Burrows 00:45, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Major Implementations
The only "major" implementation listed in the infobox is "ACK", which unfortunately is linked to the ASCII control character ACK. Could someone with more knowledge of the Modula-2 world please fix this? —Chris Chittleborough 17:33, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Done! Chris Burrows 01:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Added XDS and P1 Modula-2 today. Both compilers conform to the ISO standard. Maybe GNU Modula-2 should also be added. Cschlegel 17:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

The heading should be changed from 'Major Implementations' to 'Current Implementations' if these are to be added. Otherwise Logitech Modula-2, ETH Modula-2, TopSpeed Modula-2, StonyBrook Modula-2 etc. should also be included.

Chris Burrows 00:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Modula-2, the language of choice
Removed this:
 * Along with C and Ada, Modula-2 is often regarded as one of the three most significant "modern" programming languages (ie, of the structured programming era). Of the three, Modula-2 is the smallest, easiest to read, easiest to learn, and cleanest designed, both syntactically and conceptually.

This is in desperate need of a source (or twenty) before going back in. The second sentence is pure opinion lacking even the basic definitions (smallest how?) and the first is at least highly questionable. One of the most significant "modern" programming languages? More significant than Algol, PL/I or for that matter Pascal?

Statements like these are not helpful. We need facts or quoted opinions, not unqualified praise. For one thing, coming out on top in a comparison between C, Ada and yourself is arguably no great feat... 82.92.119.11 21:19, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Scrap Pascal from that list, since Modula2 was meant as a Pascal redesign(http://www.inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/projects.html), and in return many M2 features were backported to Pascal. From a language design point of view they are nearly the same language. 88.159.64.210 (talk) 11:19, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Modula-GM
The first experimental use of Modula-GM in an embedded controller was in the 1993 Gen-4 ECU used by the CART (Championship Auto Racing Teams) and IRL (Indy Racing League) teams[2]. The first production use of Modula-GM was its use in GM trucks starting with the 1990 model year

This makes no sense: how could the first experimental use come before the first production use? This site claims that the second generation was used in CART in 1988, which makes more sense. Metageek (talk) 20:10, 21 August 2008 (UTC) Yes, The GEN-4 Racing ECM used an experimental version of Modula-GM. By 1990 the GEN-4 was being made ready for use by CART and IRL race cars using the Chevy V8 Engines and later in the IRL's Aurora Engine until 1997. W9kfb (talk) 09:01, 18 February 2016 (UTC) In 1988, the first CART usage of Electronic Engine Management systems was on a CHEVY V8 engine for Penski Racing at the Cleveland Race, Mario A. won the race using this set up. The controller was Delco Electronics Generation -2 controller using Assembly code, not MODULA-GM. Generation -3 of the controller also used assembly code, but Development started on the GEN-4 controller in 1989 using the available compilers Delco Electronics was using in Kokomo, IN. They were at first experimental, but before the release of the 1990 comercial systems for truck VCMs, both groups (the truck software group in Kokomo and the racing ECM software group in Santa Barbara) were using a production version of MODULA-GM. W9kfb (talk) 09:30, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Modula vs Modula-2
There's no mention of the original Modula, which was the "first" redesign of Pascal. Modula had limitations similar to "classic" Pascal in that the entire program had to be submitted to the compiler as a single compilation unit. There were compilers, and some production systems were created in Modula, mostly in the US Defense community, as early as 1980-1982. --BSD Daemon (talk) 21:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Modula has its own Wiki page if you want to include the details that you refer to. The 'Influenced by' link points to it.Chris Burrows (talk) 03:10, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

M-Code
Lilith was running a M-Code. What about P-Code, M-code, S-code (Simula)... ?

--Lf69100 (talk) 07:57, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Modula-2. 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/20090904204227/http://www.info.uni-karlsruhe.de/~modula/index.php to http://www.info.uni-karlsruhe.de/~modula/index.php

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:22, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Turbo Modula-2
merge based on WP:N and size - can just be listed as an implementation there and only when/if size issues follow WP:SPINOUT Widefox ; talk 19:40, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Modula with Modula-2
There's barely enough content for Modula as it is, a merge of the two articles may be warranted, but under the discretion of genreral consensus. AtlasDuane (talk) 15:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

If anything needs to change then more content should be added to the Modula page. It wouldn't make any more sense to me to merge the two articles together than, say, merging the Apple I article with Apple II. Chris Burrows (talk) 22:10, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

→→I agree, I would vote against this merge. Two different products. JJJerr12 (talk) 15:37, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

→ I also agree with Chris Burrows. The real problem is that Modula is a Stub. JamesYoungman (talk) 11:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Closed, given the consensus to improve rather than merge. Klbrain (talk) 17:38, 30 November 2020 (UTC)