And speaking of ALGOL
cclist at sydex.com
Tue Aug 11 10:24:51 CDT 2015
On 08/11/2015 07:52 AM, Paul Koning wrote:
> Yes, that was a pretty nice system. Certainly not the first ALGOL
> system, but a decent one even though they did put a bunch of
> Fortran-like ugliness into the I/O.
As I recall, the I/O in the Algol-60 report was not particularly
well-defined. Pascal followed this pattern also.
So Burroughs could hardly be blamed.
> PDP11 DECUS ALGOL was clearly inspired by that, it’s a subset of
> Burroughs ALGOL and the generated code looks like a 16-bit variant of
> B5500 machine code.
I hadn't realized that descriptors had been implemented on the PDP-11.
> Note though that some of the discussion was about Algol 68, which is
> a rather different language. I don’t know that Burroughs ever did
> anything with it, but some other companies did (CDC for one).
I don't know where Algol 68 in the CDC world came from; I am aware of no
one in CPD Sunnyvale who worked on it. Was it a VIM contribution?
> “native” in what sense? There are plenty of machines, from many
> companies, that support block structured languages well. The PDP11
> and VAX are among those, as are the Burroughs mainframes, the
> Electrologica EL-X8, and many others. If so, they will do well at
> Algol, Pascal, C, Modula, Ada, and so on.
Well, CDC 6600 routinely beat out IBM's iron on COBOL, even without
character addressability or the capability for decimal arithmetic.
> If you mean “native” in the sense of an instruction set tailored for
> running Algol programs, no — in that sense, Burroughs was rather
> unusual, though you might point at the Electrologica EL-X8 as another
That's exactly what I mean.
More information about the cctech