public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>
To: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: c++ "with" keyword
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 12:18:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <15897.24524.853189.45228@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030105124408.2C2F5F2D5D@nile.gnat.com>

Robert Dewar writes:
 > > Believe that if you wish.  I'm not a betting man.  The Algol 68
 > > language had no implementations when it was standardized -- AFAIK the
 > > first delivery was 1977!
 > 
 > That's serious misinformation. Algol-68R, which was widely used in universities
 > industry and defence applications first appeared in 1970 (I was at Leeds
 > in the summer of 1971 and used the compiler extensively at that time, it
 > was in excellent shape). Algol-68R was a very large subset, with only a few
 > restrictions (it was much closer to full Algol-68 than any "C++" compiler
 > was to the first C++ standard when it appeared). 
 > (Good thing you did not take on the bet, sounds like you have never programmed
 > in Algol-68 :-)

 > The first complete full language implementation for the CDC was delivered
 > in 1974 only a couple of years after the revised report.

Well, for some unnacountable reason Lindsey doesn't say so.  He says
that the "CDC Netherlands" compiler, and I assume that's the one
you're talking about, was first delivered in 1977.  Of course, he may
be mistaken or he may have decided not to mention the 1974 deivery.

 > 1976 saw the appearence of Algol-68S, the widely used subset on the PDP-11
 > (that's the subset I had my students write self-bootstrapping compilers
 > on Knuth's new MIX machine, we ended up with about 10 fully bootstrapped
 > compilers from a one semester course -- so it's not *that* hard to implement)

Fair enough.  However

a.  Algol 68 was not implemented at the time it was specified
b.  Full Algol 68 was hard to implement given the resources available
c.  The difficuly of implementing the full language hurt its sucess

Andrew.

  reply	other threads:[~2003-01-06 10:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-01-05 12:56 Robert Dewar
2003-01-06 12:18 ` Andrew Haley [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-01-06 13:07 Robert Dewar
2003-01-05 18:41 Robert Dewar
2003-01-05 13:03 Robert Dewar
2003-01-05 13:39 ` Toon Moene
2003-01-05 12:56 Robert Dewar
2003-01-05 18:22 ` Joseph S. Myers
2003-01-05 12:44 Robert Dewar
2003-01-05  3:16 Robert Dewar
2003-01-05  0:38 Robert Dewar
2003-01-05  0:29 Robert Dewar
2003-01-05  0:37 ` Kevin Handy
2003-01-04 23:27 Robert Dewar
2003-01-04 23:36 ` Lynn Winebarger
2003-01-05  2:55 ` Gianni Mariani
2003-01-04 22:13 Robert Dewar
2003-01-04 20:59 Robert Dewar
2003-01-04 22:36 ` Gianni Mariani
2003-01-04 20:09 Robert Dewar
2003-01-04 19:36 Robert Dewar
2003-01-04 19:59 ` Tolga Dalman
2003-01-04 19:13 Robert Dewar
2003-01-04 20:58 ` Gianni Mariani
2003-01-04 18:11 Robert Dewar
2003-01-04 18:47 ` Gianni Mariani
2003-01-04 17:52 Robert Dewar
2003-01-04 17:59 ` Gianni Mariani
2003-01-04 17:06 Robert Dewar
2003-01-04 17:22 ` Daniel Berlin
2003-01-05 11:33 ` Andrew Haley
2003-01-05 11:36   ` Toon Moene
2003-01-04 14:29 Robert Dewar
2003-01-04 15:00 ` Momchil Velikov
2003-01-04 15:24   ` Andrew Haley
2003-01-04 16:25     ` Neil Booth
2003-01-04 17:35     ` Gianni Mariani
2003-01-04 17:59       ` Tolga Dalman
2003-01-04 18:36         ` Gianni Mariani
2003-01-04 18:54           ` Tolga Dalman
2003-01-04 23:32         ` Kevin Handy
2002-12-29  8:32 Norman Jonas
2002-12-29 12:46 ` Russ Allbery
2002-12-29  6:49 Erik Schnetter

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=15897.24524.853189.45228@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com \
    --to=aph@redhat.com \
    --cc=dewar@gnat.com \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).