[cctalk] Re: Try Algol 68 on Windows

Concerning notation, we actually could just set the nouns (numbers) and set the verbs (operators) in any order. Both the programmer and the computer know the difference. Nouns = objects, verbs = methods. I have a look-up ALU-based CPU design that has a register for operator, and registers for 1 or 2 operands. What's cool about this is that you can set the operator and just feed in a series of numbers. 74HCxx and EEPROMs. -- Roger Arrick -- Tyler, Texas, USA -- Roger(a)Arrick.com -- ________________________________ From: Joseph S. Barrera III via cctalk &lt;cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2025 6:52 PM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; Cc: Joseph S. Barrera III &lt;joe(a)barrera.org&gt; Subject: [cctalk] Re: Try Algol 68 on Windows OMG :-O Let me then suggest: LisP (List Processing) AlgoL (Algorithmic Language) JavaScript (Pure unadulterated marketing BS. Should have been named something based on "LISP disguised as Java"[1].) NOW you tell me. This is why I prefer LISP./forward-Polish-notation. First you are told what will happen, and then you discover whom it will happen to, As Laurie Anderson would say, it's like a prophecy. Doesn't it? Doesn't it look? [2] (just-kidding (should-have-been it 'ForTran)) [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4t672J3PvM [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0lShWwy_Oc On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 4:33 PM Chuck Guzis via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; wrote: > On 1/14/25 15:31, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote: > > > F90 was an extension to F77 and was entirely upwardly compatible with > > it, not an entirely new language. > > IMOHO, the most significant revision of the F77 standard by F90 was > that is was acceptable to spell the last 6 letters of the language in > lower case. (i.e. Fortran). In a way, that broke with the historical > sense of the name. It should have been ForTran. > > > F66 was important in a way, as vendor extensions had gone a bit wild. > (e.g. punch a B in column 1 and the arithmetic operators become boolean. > I think that was a feature in 7090 FMS/IBSYS). > > One defining characteristic of post-1980 languages was the assumption of > a binary radix, as opposed to systems like the 1401 or 7070, which were > decimal and lacked bitwise boolean operations. > > --Chuck > > >