> Well, Lance, the difference is, here in american universities,
> they teach terrific structured, top-down, modular programming
> technique, using a pseudo-code step translated in final Pascal
> code *ONLY* after the pseudo-code is known to be bug-free and
> structured perfectly. After which, the Pascal simply falls right
> out automatically, almost without looking. Aks any CS100 professor.
> [BTW, that's aks, not ask].

I have been an assistant for such a course (in Holland). Locating the
errors in the final progras was big fun, though I must admit that there
would have been more errors if the pseudo-code step would not have been
first. But I consider such programming 'easy', as opposed to 'interesting'
programming like time-ciritical (isosynchronous) coding, optimized inner
interpreter loops, compiler back-ends etc.

Wouter