Hallo Martin, Du schriebst am Sun, 10 Nov 2013 07:47:44 +0100:
> Sieghard suggests to use Algol 68 syntax instead to try to make the best > of 30 years of programming experience. > Opinions? Don't try. There was _never_ a complete implementation of this language around for all the time being, although the foremost computer scientists of the time worked on these compilers (way back) then. BTW: An "Oxford and Cambridge Compilers Ltd", formed around 1994, offered an Algol 68 compiler once - I don't know whether this site still exists: <http://www.occl-cam.demon.co.uk/whitepaper.html> There seems to have been another implementation from the Netherlands: <http://www.mensys.nl/catalogue/mn_algol.html> And there's (was?) mention of Algol 68 on a german site: <http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/~wolff/Algol68.html> All this dates back to before 2000, and there was probably no work done at all since. My remark wasn't even meant to be taken serious, I made it merely because so many "new" developments in the computer language field were in there nearly half a century ago... -- -- (Weitergabe von Adressdaten, Telefonnummern u.ä. ohne Zustimmung nicht gestattet, ebenso Zusendung von Werbung oder ähnlichem) ----------------------------------------------------------- Mit freundlichen Grüßen, S. Schicktanz ----------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ mseide-msegui-talk mailing list mseide-msegui-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mseide-msegui-talk
