13 Jan
2025
13 Jan
'25
4:42 p.m.
On Jan 13, 2025, at 6:00 PM, David Wade via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 13/01/2025 22:19, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
Interpreting or compiling are implementation options entirely independent of the language.
I don't know of ALGOL 60 interpreters but there's no reason why one could not be
built. I do know of an ALGOL 68 (subset) interpreter, by Ammeraal at CWI.
On 1/13/2025 3:57 PM, ben via cctalk wrote:
More like not enough actual memory. You can fit an acceptable basic into a 4K ROM so it
will work without a disk drive.
Its an interpreter so can do checks as you type it in. On 2025-01-13 12:18 p.m., Brent Hilpert via
cctalk wrote:
Funny when the 8 and 16 bit micros hit the
market, Algol seemed to vanish off the face of the earth. Was 64KB too small a address
space?
Its far easier to learn than Algol.
That's debatable. My father (a physicist and professor of metrology) found ALGOL-60
to be quite readable, he simply treated it as an odd dialect of English. (He never wrote
any, but he certainly reviewed applications written for his lab by the department
programmer.) And for me it was my first language (Fortran II being next, and Basic-Plus
fourth).
ALGOL ran just
fine on the PDP-11.
Thats not an 8-bit micro and needed a decent disk to run Algol