I have to ask, since people who'd know will probably be here, what's the "ten thousand foot view" of Oberon today? I'm aware of the lineage from Pascal/Modula, and that it was a full OS written entirely in Oberon, sort of akin to a Smalltalk or Lisp machine image. What confuses me is the later work on Oberon seems to be something of a cross between a managed runtime like Java or dot net, and the Inferno OS, where it can both run hosted or "natively". Whenever I've skimmed the wikipedia or web pages I've been a bit confused.
While working on a C++ vector engine optimized for 5M+ documents in very tight RAM (240MB), I often find myself looking back at how Oberon handled resource management. In an era where a 'hello world' app can pull in 100MB of dependencies, the idea of a full OS that is both human-readable and fits into a few megabytes is more relevant than ever.
Rochus, since you’ve worked on the IDE and the kernel: do you think the strictness of Oberon’s type system and its lean philosophy still offers a performance advantage for modern high-density data tasks, or is it primarily an educational 'ideal' at this point?
Oberon is a very nice, fun and cozy system and environment for programming. I lived in it for a few months back around 2010 and it was a joy.
I'd like to be able to dock panels of information, live-edit pieces of code instead of just "accept? Y/N", have side interactions, have real scroll bars and proper clipboards, even a live REPL alongside.
Instead we get Claude Code's janky "60fps TUI" full of bugs and barely interactive.
On the screen is (readable to me at least) the first page of the paper "Oberon Language Report" showing N. Wirth as the author.
In the Introduction to the on-screen document it says, "Oberon is a general-purpose programming language that evolved from Modula-2."
https://ignorethecode.net/blog/2009/04/22/oberon/
A more in-depth look for folks with some comp-sci knowledge:
https://www.scribd.com/document/377504715/Oberon-the-Overloo...
The Oberon language and the Oberon System were featured in Byte Magazine several times, most notably in Dick Pountain's articles:
https://vintageapple.org/byte/pdf/199103_Byte_Magazine_Vol_1... https://vintageapple.org/byte/pdf/199305_Byte_Magazine_Vol_1... https://vintageapple.org/byte/pdf/199501_Byte_Magazine_Vol_2...
Spotting similarities betwen the appearance of the Oberon System and Plan 9, or Oberon syntax bits that were used in later languages, is left as an exercise for the reader.
IF disaster THEN abort;However, people always forget we don't program in Notepad, rather programmer editors that are able to do automatic capitalisation of keywords.
It is a non problem, like discussion of parentheses or white space in programming languages that require them.
In System 3 with the Gadgets system it was already starting to feel like a proper mainstream OS, instead of the plain black and white, without framework like experience from the initial Project Oberon, even thought it was a technological achivement already, with a memory safe systems language.
I prefer the path taken down by Active Oberon, however that doesn't seem to also get that much love nowadays, and is much more complex to explore than System 3.
For those that not know it, it already had something like OLE (inspired by how Xerox PARC did it with Cedar), an AOT/JIT compilation system (with slim binaries for portability), and everything on a memory safe systems language.
Alternative being Assembly written primitives, like in Smalltalk originally. Blue book description.
If not, well there's another reason to have a Linux VM ready :)
Great Stuff!
Thanks to your work, that's about to change.
Thank you times a thousand <3
I see you're into horror stories.
Oberon is absolutely a horrible language. It's an example of how you can screw up a good language by insisting on things that were important in 1960-s.
Like not allowing multiple returns (not multiple return _values_ but multiple returns).