> On Jan 29, 2018, at 12:05 PM, Clem Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> ...
> One can argue, why did Ken not just build something more like BCPL instead of
> B? I can not say, maybe the brevity of { } from PL/1 was more attractive
> than the Algol BEGIN/END style?
PL/I has begin/end as ALGOL does. I don't know where { } came from, but it
isn't from PL/I. What perhaps did come from PL/I is ; as terminator rather
than separator.
I was looking at ALGOL syntax again recently, and noticed something
interesting: the ALGOL-60 procedure declaration syntax is nearly identical to
the K&R style function declaration syntax in C. That is, this style:
foo (a,b);
int a, b;
{ /* ... */ }
looks just like what ALGOL-60 uses.
paul
_______________________________________________
Simh mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
