Philippe Kahn first saw an opportunity for Borland, his newly formed software company, in the field of programming tools. Historically, the vast majority of programmers saw their workflow in terms of the edit/compile/link cycle, with separate tools dedicated to each task. Programmers wrote
source code using a
text editor; the source code was then compiled into
object code (often requiring multiple passes), and a
linker combined object code with runtime libraries to produce an executable program. In the early IBM PC market (1981–1983) the major
programming tool vendors all made compilers that worked in a similar fashion. For example, the
Microsoft Pascal system consisted of two compiler passes and a final linking pass (which could take minutes on systems with only floppy disks for secondary storage, even though programs were very much smaller than they are today). This process was less resource-intensive than the later
integrated development environment (IDE). Vendors of software development tools aimed their products at professional developers, and the price for these basic tools plus ancillary tools like
profilers ran into the hundreds of dollars. Kahn's idea was to package all these functions in an integrated programming toolkit designed to have much better performance and resource utilization than the usual professional development tools, and charge a low price for a package integrating a custom text editor, compiler, and all functionality needed to produce executable programs. The program was sold by direct mail order for , without going through established sales channels (retailers or resellers). The Turbo Pascal compiler was based on the Blue Label Pascal compiler originally produced for the NasSys cassette-based operating system of the
Nascom microcomputer in 1981 by
Anders Hejlsberg. Borland licensed Hejlsberg's "PolyPascal" compiler core (
Poly Data was the name of Hejlsberg's company in Denmark), and added the user interface and editor. Anders Hejlsberg joined the company as an employee and was the architect for all versions of the Turbo Pascal compiler and the first three versions of Borland
Delphi. The compiler was first released as Compas Pascal for
CP/M, and then released on 20 November 1983 as Turbo Pascal for CP/M (including the
Apple II fitted with a
Z-80 SoftCard, effectively converting the
6502-based Apple into a CP/M machine, the Commodore 64 with CP/M cartridge, and the later
DEC Rainbow), CP/M-86, and DOS machines. On its launch in the
United States market, Turbo Pascal retailed for , a very low price for a compiler at the time. The integrated Pascal compiler was of good quality compared to other Pascal products of the time. The Turbo name alluded to the speed of compiling and of the executables produced. The edit/compile/run cycle was fast compared to other Pascal implementations because everything related to building the program was stored in RAM, and because it was a
one-pass compiler written in
assembly language. Compiling was much faster than compilers for other languages (even Borland's own later compilers for C), and other Pascal compilers, and programmer time was also saved since the program could be compiled and run from the IDE. The execution speed of these
COM-format programs was a revelation for developers whose only prior experience programming microcomputers was with
interpreted BASIC or
UCSD Pascal, which compiled to
p-code which was then interpreted at runtime. Unlike some other development tools, Turbo Pascal disks had no
copy protection. Turbo Pascal came with the "Book License": "You must treat this software
just like a book ... [it] may be used by any number of people ... may be freely moved from one computer location to another, so long as there is no possibility of it being used at one location while it's being used at another."
Reception Borland sold about 250,000 copies of Turbo Pascal in two years, which
Bruce F. Webster of
Byte described as "an amazing figure for a computer language". He reported six months later that the figure had risen to "more than 400,000 copies in a marketplace that had been estimated as having only 30,000 potential buyers".
Jerry Pournelle wrote in the magazine in February 1984 that Turbo Pascal "comes close to what I think the computer industry is headed for: well documented, standard, plenty of good features, and a reasonable price". He disliked the requirement to buy another license to distribute binaries, but noted that "it turns out not to be a lot more. Borland only wants another " atop the base price, and that "my first impression of Turbo is that it's probably worth . It looks to do everything
MT+ with the Speed Programming Package does, and maybe even do it faster and better". Pournelle reported in July that Turbo 2.0's
overlays "[allow] you to write big programs". According to Kahn, IBM had refused to resell Turbo Pascal unless the price was at least ; Pournelle noted that "Turbo is much better than the Pascal IBM sells", and unlike the latter was compatible with the
IBM PCjr. Three
Byte reviewers praised Turbo Pascal in the same issue. One reviewer said that because of dialect differences "Turbo is not really Pascal. But it's very useful". While cautioning that it was not suitable for developing very large applications, he concluded that Turbo Pascal "is well written, fun to use at times, and fast enough to make up for its few shortcomings ... it is a bargain that shouldn't be passed up". A second called the DOS version "without doubt, the best software value I have ever purchased", while a third said that Borland "deserves praise for" the "high-value" CP/M version. Also in July 1984,
Creative Computing favorably compared Turbo Pascal to what the reviewer described as mediocre and expensive Pascals from UCSD, IBM, and Microsoft. He reported converting code written in IBM Pascal in less than 30 minutes, and that "under IBM Pascal, the average program took two weeks to write. With Turbo Pascal, the average is now two days". While noting the .COM and 64 KB limitations, the reviewer approved of Turbo's close adherence to the Jensen and Wirth language standard. The documentation was, he wrote, of "above average readability" and superior to IBM Pascal's. "My only fear", the review concluded, was that "it is grossly underpriced, and I worry that people might fail to take it seriously". "Turbo Pascal is the Pascal to acquire",
Computer Language in September said of version 2.0. Praising its speed, extensions including PC graphics and sound, documentation, ease of using overlays, and "highly standard syntax", the magazine recommended Turbo to both new and experienced programmers.
PC Magazine was similarly complimentary in November, stating that "nothing like Turbo Pascal has ever existed for PC-DOS before". It praised 2.0's low price, speed, stability, ease of implementing overlays, and unusually good documentation for a compiler, and noted the existence of many utilities for Turbo Pascal from other companies. The review stated that the IDE that simplified the edit-compile-run-debug loop made Turbo Pascal accessible, like BASIC, to new programmers. Pournelle in August 1985 called version 3.0 "a distinct improvement on the already impressive version 2" and said that the new book license "seems quite fair to me". He said that "Turbo Pascal has got to be the best value in languages on the market today", and that Borland led the industry in "delivering excellent products at reasonable costs". Webster also praised 3.0, stating in August 1985 that Turbo Pascal "is best known for its small size, incredible compile speeds, and fast execution times". He noted that the software's quality and low price was especially surprising after the "
JRT Pascal fiasco", and stated that even at the new higher price, it was "probably still the best software deal on the market". Despite finding what the magazine called "a serious bug" in 3.0, and decreased compatibility with
PC clones,
Byte in February 1986 stated that "it is hard to avoid recommending Turbo to anyone who wants to program in Pascal", citing improved speed and graphic routines. When reviewing four other Pascal compilers in December 1986, the magazine described Turbo Pascal 3.0 as "practical and attractive to programmers at all levels of expertise". Besides allowing applications larger than 64 KB,
Byte in 1988 reported substantially faster compiling and executing for version 4.0, and that although it did not maintain previous versions' "almost total" backward compatibility, conversion was fast and easy. The reviewer concluded, "I highly recommend Turbo Pascal 4.0 as an addition to any programmer's software repertoire".
Byte in 1989 listed Turbo C and Turbo Pascal as among the "Distinction" winners of the Byte Awards. Citing their user interface and continued emphasis on speed, the magazine stated that "for rapid prototyping there's not much better". In the same issue Pournelle again praised version 4.0 and 5.0 of Turbo Pascal. Citing
Anacreon as "a good example of how complex a program you can write in Pascal", and the many libraries from Borland and other developers, he wrote "I think it may well be the language for the rest of us".
InfoWorld in 1991 said that Turbo Pascal for Windows 1.0 at $249 "continues to offer power, speed, simplicity, and a price/performance ratio that is one of the best in the industry". The magazine stated that Turbo "is definitely more Windows-oriented than
Borland C++", improved on the latter's already excellent IDE, and "included some of the best documentation we've seen", with "the fastest turnaround from code to test we've seen in a low-level Windows programming environment".
InfoWorld recommended it to "any Windows programmer". Scott MacGregor of Microsoft said that
Bill Gates "couldn't understand why our stuff was so slow" compared to Turbo Pascal. "He would bring in poor
Greg Whitten [programming director of Microsoft languages] and yell at him for half an hour" because their company was unable to defeat Kahn's small startup, MacGregor recalled.
Successors By 1995 Borland had dropped Turbo/Borland Pascal and replaced it with the
rapid application development (RAD) environment
Borland Delphi, based on Object Pascal. The
32- and
64-bit Delphi versions still support the more portable Pascal enhancements of the earlier products (i.e., those not specific to
16-bit code) including the earlier static object model. This language backwards compatibility means much old Turbo Pascal code can still be compiled and run in a modern environment today. In 2006, Borland revived the Turbo brand name for a new line of single-language IDEs based on
Borland Developer Studio 2006, including
Turbo Delphi,
Turbo C++, and
Turbo C#. These products were discontinued in October 2009. Other suppliers have produced software development tools compatible with Turbo Pascal. The best-known are
Free Pascal and
Virtual Pascal. ==Features==