Apple's UCSD Pascal for the Apple II used its own file system rather than the existing DOS 3.3 of the day. I'm not sure if it overlapped SOS at all, but regardless of timelines it seems that the Pascal file system was separate and incompatible from SOS and the later derived ProDOS.

What was the point of Apple Pascal having its own file system? Why couldn't it have just used DOS 3.3 or at least ended up serving as a compatible base for SOS / ProDOS?

  • The focus of the question is on why UCSD Pascal for Apple used its own file system, but I wanted to point out that Microsoft DOS in particular was not an available file system of the day. Apple computers never used DOS, and, moreover, UCSD Pascal for Apple ][ was released before the the original IBM PC (and DOS 1.0). – John Bollinger Sep 2 '17 at 5:22
  • I learned on an Apple //e running UCSD Pascal! It has a fond place in my heart. What bugged me was that the floppy only held 140K or something like that. It was also difficult to ship an app for endusers when the file system requires contiguous blocks! – JDługosz Sep 2 '17 at 6:37
  • 9
    @JohnBollinger, DOS 3.3 is an early Apple II file system that was popular from introduction in 1978 until the mid-1980s when ProDOS presumably took over. I was not referring to Microsoft MS-DOS. – bjb Sep 5 '17 at 16:46

UCSD Pascal was a product of UCSD - The University of California at San Diego. It was not a product of Apple.

UCSD Pascal was available on a number of machines, including the PDP-11, TI99/4, the BBC Micro and the IBM PC. It was a noble attempt to produce a fully cross-platform language.

UCSD Pascal used a disk filing system that was intended to be implemented across all hardware platforms. Thus enabling software written and compiled to P-code on one machine to be used on another. The filing system did away with proprietary restrictions on the lengths and formats of filenames, which were seen as a bar to interoperability.

In my experience transfer wasn't as seamless as was planned but it did greatly assist cross-platform development.

  • 3
    Not realy. ApplePASCAL was an Apple Product, based on UCSD Pascal. The initial revision was bases on the P-Code System 2.1, but with an independant development from there on (AFAIR there where 4 or 5 Releases Apple did). In todays tems it might be called a fork. – Raffzahn Aug 31 '17 at 16:45
  • 1
    Many from the problems of transfering P-Code programms came from the fact that the P-Code was changed several times in incompatible manner. To transfer binary (P-Code) proframms, the receiving machine must implement the same P-Code version. Thanks to that quirk UCSD-Pascal was only real cross platform on a source code base. It was a bit like Linux/Unix. You need to recompile when changing the machine, but you had a great chance of doing so without any need for changes. – Raffzahn Aug 31 '17 at 16:49
  • 3
    @Chenmunk I'd have thought the intent was that programs would be interchangeable, without having to worry about filename conventions (e.g. C:\usr\file.txt vs. /usr/file.txt). – TripeHound Sep 1 '17 at 13:02
  • 1
    @dirkt I'm referring to the small ROM — maybe 256 bytes, or around that, but I'm at work now so not minded to start searching Google for "Apple ROM"-type phrases — that Woz used to implement his state machine. Probably not used by garden variety emulators, as it was mildly difficult to find, but likely used by the good ones. Never visible within any CPU's address space. EDIT: from my phone, I'm referring to: retro.co.za/ccc/apple2/christer/Apple/p6.romdump.html . – Tommy Sep 1 '17 at 15:36
  • 1
    @RuiFRibeiro: The game "Wizardry" had been previously published on the Apple II using the UCSD P-system was ported to the IBM PC, also using the UCSD P-system. While there are some slight changes to the graphics, I wouldn't be surprised if the game code is essentially untouched. – supercat May 24 '18 at 22:16

UCSD Pascal was developed prior to the Apple II, during the 70's in San Diego, using PDP-11 class machines with a 512-byte block disk structure. In the process of porting it to microcomputers, often (not always) the file system also got ported.

UCSD Pascal was seen as a closed environment offering everything in one place. Today we might call this an IDE and see it as an application on top of an existing OS. But back in the very early microcomputer days most machines didn't have a DOS of their own. And even if some OSes were available, they were usually rather frugal and mostly just a bunch of hacks to attach floppies one way or another (let's be serious, the Apple DOS was one of them). Thus just only adapting the very basic hardware drivers while keeping everything above in transportable P-code, was a rather clever solution.

Keep in mind, the goal of the P-System was to offer students a standardized programming environment, where they could work on every machine, the university could afford, like on a PDP and have create exactly the same replicable results a course requies. It was never ment to be a language kit for software development for microcomputer systems.

To some extent it was quite similar to early mainframe applications — what we nowadays see as an OS was an integral part of the application, thus forming a world of its own. It wasn't until much later that the P-code system changed from a standalone application to a runtime package running on top of a 'regular' OS (like PC-DOS).

Adopting Pascal for the Apple II can be seen as the first major step of Apple into the educational market. In the course of history, SOS and later ProDOS did inherit the 512 byte block size from the UCSD P-code system, as Pascal was the main implementation language for the Apple III — and later all Mac software. In fact, for some time the Pascal development did also drive Apple II development in general. For example, release 1.1 introduced the 'Firmware Protocol' that required add-on cards to show certain signatures at $Cn05/07/0B and $Cn0C to help identify a card and its functions. Due to the importance of Apple Pascal, hardware manufacturers added them soon. ProDOS (and GS/OS) rely on these markers to identify and handle cards they know.

  • 1
    So if I am to interpret your answer inline with the spirit of my question, it is simply because UCSD Pascal was ported as a whole for the Apple II which included the filesystem to simplify many of the layers of the universal P-code system? i.e. it was for simplicity of the P-code system rather than the practicality of what was in place for the Apple II at the time? – bjb Sep 5 '17 at 16:50

Pascal for the Apple /// actually used the SOS file format and was compatible with files written by Business Basic. SOS was adapted into ProDOS for the Apple II-series machines, but Pascal /// was never ported to it to my knowledge. And, yes, it's a darn shame Pascal and the other UCSD languages FORTRAN, BASIC, and MODULA/2 couldn't run together.

  • Welcome to Retrocomputing Stack Exchange. Please read the tour. This isn't quite an answer, but it's close enough to be useful. – wizzwizz4 May 9 '18 at 15:38

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.