> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simh [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bob
> Eager
> Sent: 29 January 2018 22:08
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Simh] BLISS and C
>
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 12:05:01 -0500
> 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?
>
> BCPL was, in any case, using $( $) and (later) { }. It never used BEGIN/END.
>
The "B" compiler I used on the Honeywell L6000/L66 used { }.
> And the major drawback of BCPL (which I love) was that it was word
> oriented. Most machine architectures were not (OK, PDP-10...) One had to
> use contortions, and a special % operator, to access bytes efficiently.
>
"B" is similar, characters were accessed by functions rather than a special
operator, but you can, I think use a combination of shifts and logical
operators....
... those familiar with BCPL or C who have not encountered B may find the
manual here interesting...
https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/dmr/www/bref.html
it would be nice to find a working compiler for a word based machine...
> _______________________________________________
> Simh mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
Dave
_______________________________________________
Simh mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
