13 Jan
2025
13 Jan
'25
4:07 p.m.
This sounds like FLACC (Full Language Algol68 Checkout Compiler) by Chris Thomson and
Colin Broughton:
"You know, we only ever got 22 copies installed, and less than 5 of those in North
America. Even though it ran on 370's under MVS, CMS and MTS, and was cheap and
reliable. Talk about a marketing disaster. " [Chris Thomson, comp.lang.misc,
November 27, 1988]
https://www.softwarepreservation.org/projects/ALGOL/algol68impl/#FLACC
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 07:02:08 -0800
From: "Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TFX/VE6BBM)" <lyndon(a)orthanc.ca
<mailto:lyndon@orthanc.ca>>
Subject: [cctalk] Re: Try Algol 68 on Windows
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org <mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org>>
Message-ID: <58bac767a09d3a37(a)orthanc.ca
<mailto:58bac767a09d3a37@orthanc.ca>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mike Parr via cctalk writes:
Hello all.
Here is a link to something I wrote - brief intro to Algol 68's background, a
nd how to run it on Windows - with a toy IDE as well.
This triggers a fuzzy memory of an Algol 68 compiler running on
MTS at the U of Alberta, circa 1980. ISTR Chris Thompson at UofA
Computing Services had a hand in its development.
Was this just a UofA thing? Did it escape to other MTS installations?
Did anyone use it to write substantial programs on MTS? Or was it
intended for Comp. Sci. teaching purposes?
--lyndon 
5:55 p.m.
New subject: Try Algol 68 on Windows
I would expect universal condemnation for anyone who would ask if FLACC
were designed for floppies.
On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 5:34 PM Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TFX/VE6BBM) via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
Paul McJones via cctalk writes:
This sounds like FLACC (Full Language Algol68
Checkout Compiler) by
Chris Tho
mson and Colin Broughton:
Yes, that's the one. On MTS is lived in *FLACC.
--lyndon
14 Jan
14 Jan
1:50 a.m.
New subject: Try Algol 68 on Windows
On 2025-01-13 6:55 p.m., Joseph S. Barrera III via cctalk wrote:
I would expect universal condemnation for anyone who
would ask if FLACC
were designed for floppies.
Did mainframes ever have a floppy option?
Do any copies exist and what was the
meduium?
5:29 a.m.
New subject: Try Algol 68 on Windows
On 2025-01-13 6:55 p.m., Joseph S. Barrera III via
cctalk wrote:
> I would expect universal condemnation for anyone who would ask if FLACC
> were designed for floppies.
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025, ben via cctalk wrote:
Did mainframes ever have a floppy option?
Do any copies exist and what was the meduium?
What do you consider to be a "mainframe"?
IBM's 23FD "Minnow" (arguably the first use of floppy disks) was for
loading microcode into the 3330.
Development at IBM started in late 1960s under Alan Shugart, and
completed? in 1971.
https://www.computerhistory.org/storageengine/floppy-disk-loads-mainframe-c…
The Memorex 650 (1972) was the first commercially available floppy drive.
Its 8" floppies were hard sectored, with holes outward of teack
zero; 50 tracks, with 8 sectors per track. later, 8, 16, or 32 sectors
You don't see THOSE disks much, any more.
Floppies were later used for data-entry (1973, 33FD for 3740). In those
days, data entry was for "mainframes". That was the "first" to use
the
soft sectored format, which became the "standard". ("3740 SSSD
format")
It held same data as 3000 cards. And, it did not require diagonal magic
marker lines on the deck, since dropping it did not rearrange the records!
Shugart left to go to Memorex, and then eventually formed Shugart
Associates (1973)
[NOT about floppies:]
After Shugart sold his company to Xerox, he started "Shugart Technology"
(1978).
Xerox informed him that their purchase of Shugart Associates included the
name (trademark), and he could not use his name. They renamed the company
"Seagate Technology".
Lesson: do not name your company after yourself! If/when you sell the
company, you no longer own IP rights to your own name.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
8:33 a.m.
New subject: Try Algol 68 on Windows
On 1/14/25 07:29, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
IBM 370's had an 8"
floppy, but I doubt it was accessible to
the OS or user programs. It was used to load main firmware,
emulators and diagnostics. IBM must have had something at
the factory to make those floppies.
Jon
On 2025-01-13
6:55 p.m., Joseph S. Barrera III via cctalk
wrote:
> I would expect universal condemnation for anyone who
> would ask if FLACC
> were designed for floppies.
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025, ben via cctalk wrote:
Did mainframes ever have a floppy option?
Do any copies exist and what was the meduium?
10:09 a.m.
New subject: Try Algol 68 on Windows
On 2025-01-14 6:29 a.m., Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
Floppies were later used for data-entry (1973, 33FD
for 3740). In those
days, data entry was for "mainframes". That was the "first" to use
the
soft sectored format, which became the "standard". ("3740 SSSD
format")
It held same data as 3000 cards. And, it did not require diagonal magic
marker lines on the deck, since dropping it did not rearrange the records!
I was thinking files, not data entry.
Could one write card data to them?
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
8:28 a.m.
New subject: Try Algol 68 on Windows
On 1/14/25 03:50, ben via cctalk wrote:
On 2025-01-13 6:55 p.m., Joseph S. Barrera III via
cctalk
wrote:
IBM 370's had an 8" floppy, but I doubt it was accessible to
the OS or user programs. It was used to load main firmware,
emulators and diagnostics. IBM must have had something at
the factory to make those floppies.
Jon
I would expect universal condemnation for anyone
who
would ask if FLACC
were designed for floppies.
Did mainframes ever have a floppy option?
Do any copies exist and what was the
meduium? 
12:54 p.m.
New subject: Try Algol 68 on Windows
On 14/01/2025 16:28, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote:
On 1/14/25 03:50, ben via cctalk wrote:
There were definitely floppy drives in a 3174 (the controller for the
3270 terminals). I never found out what they were for! They were
attached to a 4381 that was running an old 370 assembler program (the
4381 being the last CPU that was was 370 code compatible, or so I was
told). If you're a legacy IBM person, this involved PAMs, and you
probably know which software this is :-)
On 2025-01-13 6:55 p.m., Joseph S. Barrera III
via cctalk wrote:
IBM 370's had an 8" floppy, but I doubt it was accessible to the OS or
user programs. It was used to load main firmware, emulators and
diagnostics. IBM must have had something at the factory to make those
floppies.
Jon
I would expect universal condemnation for anyone
who would ask if FLACC
were designed for floppies.
Did mainframes ever have a floppy option?
Do any copies exist and what was the
meduium? 
1:23 p.m.
New subject: 3174 - Was Re: Try Algol 68 on Windowsnn
On 14/01/2025 20:54, Frank Leonhardt via cctalk wrote:
On 14/01/2025 16:28, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote:
The 3174 runs firmware that interfaces between the mainframe channel and
the screens. The original 3270 type terminals are pretty dumb. The
connect to the 3174 by co-ax cable which I think runs at 1M/bit/sec. It
displays characters sent to it, and sends keystrokes to the 3174. So the
3174 runs a "control program" which manages the terminals. It keeps a
map of the screen, receives and stores characters and sends them to the
mainframe only when a key which requires an interaction is pressed. The
floppies in the 3174 are not accessible by the mainframe.
In fact a 3174 can do quite a few things. It can also do Telnet and ANSI
terminal emulation to a UNIX or VMS host. There is a key which allows
the user to rotate round the sessions. It can also connect to the
mainframe by BI-SYNC, SDLC/SNA, X.25 or Token Ring. Versatile but slow.
Dave
On 1/14/25 03:50, ben via cctalk wrote:
There were definitely floppy drives in a 3174 (the controller for the
3270 terminals). I never found out what they were for! They were
attached to a 4381 that was running an old 370 assembler program (the
4381 being the last CPU that was was 370 code compatible, or so I was
told). If you're a legacy IBM person, this involved PAMs, and you
probably know which software this is :-)
On 2025-01-13 6:55 p.m., Joseph S. Barrera III
via cctalk wrote:
IBM 370's had an 8" floppy, but I doubt it was accessible to the OS
or user programs. It was used to load main firmware, emulators and
diagnostics. IBM must have had something at the factory to make
those floppies.
Jon
I would expect universal condemnation for anyone
who would ask if
FLACC
were designed for floppies.
Did mainframes ever have a floppy option?
Do any copies exist and what was the
meduium? 
12:13 p.m.
New subject: Try Algol 68 on Windows
ben via cctalk writes:
Do any copies exist and what was the meduium?
Is anyone in touch with or know how to track down Chris Thompson?
It would be worth asking if he preserved the FLACC source code
anywhere? If it still lives, we could take a crack at getting it
running on MTS under simh. Danny Boulet might know how to find
him, but I don't have an email address for him any more.
--lyndon
4:40 a.m.
New subject: Try Algol 68 on Windows
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 at 02:02, Joseph S. Barrera III via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
I would expect universal condemnation for anyone who would ask if FLACC
were designed for floppies.
Er. Is this a somewhat tortuous joke about the large file sizes of the
FLAC audio compression format, its resultant large file sizes, and the
number of floppies you'd need to store them?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLAC
Apparently it averages about 9MB per minute. So a 3min song would need
about 20 diskettes of 1.4MB.
--
Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lproven(a)cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lproven(a)gmail.com
Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven
IoM: (+44) 7624 227612: UK: (+44) 7939-087884
Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053
8:43 a.m.
New subject: Try Algol 68 on Windows
OMG I am so sorry. It’s a play on “flaccid”
And I will spare you any comments about 8” floppies
apologies to all
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 4:40 AM Liam Proven via cctalk <
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 at 02:02, Joseph S. Barrera III
via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
I would expect universal condemnation for anyone who would ask if FLACC
were designed for floppies.
Er. Is this a somewhat tortuous joke about the large file sizes of the
FLAC audio compression format, its resultant large file sizes, and the
number of floppies you'd need to store them?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLAC
Apparently it averages about 9MB per minute. So a 3min song would need
about 20 diskettes of 1.4MB.
--
Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lproven(a)cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lproven(a)gmail.com
Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven
IoM: (+44) 7624 227612: UK: (+44) 7939-087884
Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053
21
days inactive
21
days old
13 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
ben -
David Wade -
Frank Leonhardt -
Fred Cisin -
Jon Elson -
Joseph S. Barrera III -
Liam Proven -
Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TFX/VE6BBM) -
Paul McJones -
William Donzelli