DOCSLIB.ORG

'The Input Language System of Automatic Programming (ABS14) ' By

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

-1- 'The Input Language System of Automatic Programming (ABS14) ' By: A.P. Ershov., G.I. Koschuhin, U. M. Voloshin. Published by the Computational Centre of the Academy of Sciences of the U.S.S.R. Mosc9w 1961. Also distributed to the Algol Bulletin List as ABS 14. The translation of the foreword and introduction comprises the first 22 pages out of the total 173 pages of the above book, and contains a 'talky - talky' description of the authorB aims and proposals, some of which have subsequently been revised. The translation was made by R. W. Hockney with help of G. Williams and @. J. Tee in April 1962. A complete translation of the final version of the tInput ~anaguage I ~ill be published by the Brighton APIC as Vol.III of APIC studies in Data Processing. !be structure of this description of the input language follows to the maximum extent the structure of the 'Report on the Algor~thmic language Ugcl 60'. In particular the numbering and naming of the corresponding sections is retained. The whole text, rslating $0 those parts of the which coincide with the corresponding parts of Algol 60, . is taken where possible in full from the correspondi text of' Algol 60, All the paragraphs or larger units of the text? section, paragraphs etc. ,) ,which are supplements to Algol 60; are pointed out by asterisks. Additional metitlinguistic formulad (1),&fining the establised (1) for brevity neta-linguistic fornulM are called Id - formube. units of the language mill also be indicated in the margin by asterisks. Additional M- formulae of an auxiliary character, are indicated in the margin by dots. - In the case, when an Id- formulas ,present in Algol 60, is removed, this will be clearly indicated in the corresponding section. All references from the 'Report on the Algorithmic language Algol 60' will have the form ALGn, where n is the number of the oorresponding section, for emmple ALG.5, ALG4.7.3.2 etc. Moscow July 1960, Introduotion The present work contains a description of the input language system of automhtic programming in the form suggested by the Institute of Mathematics of the Siberian section of the Academy of Sciences of the U.S .S.R. - Work was started in the Institue of Mathematics on the automation of progrnmming in the autumn of 19%. From the beginning it became clear that, it was necessary to acwve full clarity with regard to the input language, before proceeding with the preparation of programming algorithms and the construction of a pragramming programme. Therefore the basic work, which was accomplished in the first stage consisted of the study and analysis of the input languages of the most interesting systems for the automation of przograrnrning. Of the systems investigated which have influenced the concepts of the authors, we must mention the following PPS (l), PP MGU (2). FOR!f!RAN (3) and UNICODE (4). (1) Ershov. A.P. , KIM KV, PPS - A translator for the computing machine AP;ROW - 3, Published by the Computation Centre of Academy of Sciences of the U.S. S.R, Moscow 1960. (2) Trif'onov N.P. Concerning some special translators at Moscow State University. Lecture which was given to All-Union meeting on computer mathema-tics and computer techrLques. Mosoow State University, Mosoow, 16 - 21 November 1959. (3) FOR!I!FUN, Instruction for use, From the collection of translations 'Autonatic prog~arnming' under the editorship AoP* Ershov. FIZMPITGIZ Moscow, 1960 (b cing printed). L (4) UNICODE - P system of automatic programming for the automatic c~mput~emachine UNIVAC SCIL'NTIFIC llO3A. From the collection of transiations 'Automatic programmingt under the editorship of AJ?, Ershov, FIZIULTGIZ Moscow 1960 (being printed). However~ in contrast with the earlier input languages, it was decile~ to lay down as a foundation of the project the following basic principles° (i) To sto.y within the framework of an algebraic language and to give the maximum assistance to mathematicians in the recording of algorithms for the solution of problems in numerical analysis and their solution on a machine. To make the languages as far as possibile, independent of the specific characteristics of particular computing machines, thus giving it tile character of a universal common language. In this cor~ection it was natural that the project of the international algorithmic languv~ge ALGOL, especially attracted our attention, and interest both when it first appeared and when the first information was received for the Zurich Conference. (5). (5) tReport on the algorithmic langauge ALGOL t. UBder the editorship of A.J. Perlis and K. Samelson. Translated from the English. Published by the Computation Centre ~f the Academy of Sciences of the U.S.S.R. 1960. , ill i ill , - - l J |.| IH m ' l II ,i i i A thorough study of the project ALGOL 58 (1) lead us to the ............ | i l|i ,|, l i i |L i I . (1) The earlier 'Report on an algorithmic langmage' By analogy with f~GOL 60 was called Algol 58. conclusion that this project could be made the foundations of our work of constructing an input language. Howeverj at this timer the analysis of Algol 58 on the one hand, and of typical formulae of mathematical problems on the other, convinced us that the de~riptive means of Algol 58 should be considerably extendedp in order that it might become in fact a convenient tool of the programmer an~ mathematician. The creation of the first version of the input language was the ~second stage of the work. The general outlines of the language were developed between June and October 1959. They were discussed at a meeting of a seminar of the programming section of the Institue of Mathematics and were first explained in a lecture by A.P. Ershov (6). ~i i i i |.. U HH , | , . m i , |,m , I | ' (6) Ershov A.P. Wh~.t ought to be next in programming programme s? Leetu2e, which was given to the All - Union meeting on computational mathematics and computational techniques. Mosoo~ State University, Moscow,s, 16 - 21 November 1959. -- i .I u i i i. , j iii i ,m ,i i ii ,i, , | n i i The precise description of the 1st version of the input language was written by U. M. Voloshin. A. P. Ershov, and V. A. Yankov in March 1960. At this time information became available to us of the Paris Conference o~ Algol~ held in January 1960, as a result of which a new version of the algorithmic langauge, known as Algol 60 (7) appeared. -4- V~rLle studying Algol 60, we hotedwith satisfaction that practically all the imp~ovements~ which were made in Algol 60 as compared with Algol 58, corresponded with our point of view. This agreement (dlssregarding certain differences in the formulation of these improvements) was the more remarkable, when it is borne in mind that until March 1960 we, in point of fact did not have any preliminary information about the character of the reworking of Algol 58. As a consequence at this we resolved to construct a 2nd version of the input language the structure of which would approach as olosel~ ,J as possible t~ that of Algol 60. The development of the second version which, was accomplished by the authors between April and July 1960, formed the third stage of the creation of the input language. The description of the second version forms the subject of the present report. The basic constituents of this work consisted of a oc~eful analysis and comparison of the 1st version of the input language and Algol 60, in the removal of secondary a~fferenees and supplements, by proposing supplements in such a way that they would correspond as far as possible to the framework of Algol 60. Fellow workers in the department of the theory of Algorithms and programz~ng of the Institute of Mathematics of the Siberian Section of the Academy of Sciences of the U.S.SoR, were of great assistance to the authors by preparing various ~examples of computational algorithms written both in the input language and in Algol 60. In the proposed project of the input language the scope and structure of Algol 60 is completely retained. In particular any algorithm , written in Algol 60 is the same algorithm in the input language. In this zase it is more correct to say of the input language, not that it is a sepante language but that it is an extension of Algol 60. Even if we do not mention that the basic principles of Algol 60 formed the basis of the input langauge the other points in view of the authors are reflected in the proposed additions. Full infozmation concerning the syntax and scmantio s of the proposed additions are found in the basic part of this work called 'The Description b~c~e Input Language t . However, for the purpose of orientation, we would like to describe shortly in the introdution the essence of the proposed supplements and to give some motivation. All essential supplements to Algol 60, which are contained in the input language, fall into the foll qwing_cate{ories. ~he Introduction of Mu~ti-~imens!onal quantities and 0perat.ions on them. It is well known that in Algol 60 components in arithmetic operations can be only scalar quantities. This seems to us to be extremely incoHvenient as, in the majority of cases, schemes for algorithms are encumbered by surplus information, It is well known that computational algorithms in linear algebra take a particular eleg~ut and compact form when written in~ector and matrix notation.
Recommended publications
  • A Politico-Social History of Algolt (With a Chronology in the Form of a Log Book)

    A Politico-Social History of Algolt (With a Chronology in the Form of a Log Book)

    A Politico-Social History of Algolt (With a Chronology in the Form of a Log Book) R. w. BEMER Introduction This is an admittedly fragmentary chronicle of events in the develop­ ment of the algorithmic language ALGOL. Nevertheless, it seems perti­ nent, while we await the advent of a technical and conceptual history, to outline the matrix of forces which shaped that history in a political and social sense. Perhaps the author's role is only that of recorder of visible events, rather than the complex interplay of ideas which have made ALGOL the force it is in the computational world. It is true, as Professor Ershov stated in his review of a draft of the present work, that "the reading of this history, rich in curious details, nevertheless does not enable the beginner to understand why ALGOL, with a history that would seem more disappointing than triumphant, changed the face of current programming". I can only state that the time scale and my own lesser competence do not allow the tracing of conceptual development in requisite detail. Books are sure to follow in this area, particularly one by Knuth. A further defect in the present work is the relatively lesser availability of European input to the log, although I could claim better access than many in the U.S.A. This is regrettable in view of the relatively stronger support given to ALGOL in Europe. Perhaps this calmer acceptance had the effect of reducing the number of significant entries for a log such as this. Following a brief view of the pattern of events come the entries of the chronology, or log, numbered for reference in the text.
  • BASIC Session

    BASIC Session

    BASIC Session Chairman: Thomas Cheatham Speaker: Thomas E. Kurtz PAPER: BASIC Thomas E. Kurtz Darthmouth College 1. Background 1.1. Dartmouth College Dartmouth College is a small university dating from 1769, and dedicated "for the educa- tion and instruction of Youth of the Indian Tribes in this Land in reading, writing and all parts of learning . and also of English Youth and any others" (Wheelock, 1769). The undergraduate student body (now nearly 4000) outnumbers all graduate students by more than 5 to 1, and majors predominantly in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (over 75%). In 1940 a milestone event, not well remembered until recently (Loveday, 1977), took place at Dartmouth. Dr. George Stibitz of the Bell Telephone Laboratories demonstrated publicly for the first time, at the annual meeting of the American Mathematical Society, the remote use of a computer over a communications line. The computer was a relay cal- culator designed to carry out arithmetic on complex numbers. The terminal was a Model 26 Teletype. Another milestone event occurred in the summer of 1956 when John McCarthy orga- nized at Dartmouth a summer research project on "artificial intelligence" (the first known use of this phrase). The computer scientists attending decided a new language was needed; thus was born LISP. [See the paper by McCarthy, pp. 173-185 in this volume. Ed.] 1.2. Dartmouth Comes to Computing After several brief encounters, Dartmouth's liaison with computing became permanent and continuing in 1956 through the New England Regional Computer Center at MIT, HISTORY OF PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES 515 Copyright © 1981 by the Association for Computing Machinery, Inc.
  • Die Gruncllehren Cler Mathematischen Wissenschaften

    Die Gruncllehren Cler Mathematischen Wissenschaften

    Die Gruncllehren cler mathematischen Wissenschaften in Einzeldarstellungen mit besonderer Beriicksichtigung der Anwendungsgebiete Band 135 Herausgegeben von J. L. Doob . E. Heinz· F. Hirzebruch . E. Hopf . H. Hopf W. Maak . S. Mac Lane • W. Magnus. D. Mumford M. M. Postnikov . F. K. Schmidt· D. S. Scott· K. Stein Geschiiftsfiihrende Herausgeber B. Eckmann und B. L. van der Waerden Handbook for Automatic Computation Edited by F. L. Bauer· A. S. Householder· F. W. J. Olver H. Rutishauser . K. Samelson· E. Stiefel Volume I . Part a Heinz Rutishauser Description of ALGOL 60 Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1967 Prof. Dr. H. Rutishauser Eidgenossische Technische Hochschule Zurich Geschaftsfuhrende Herausgeber: Prof. Dr. B. Eckmann Eidgenossische Tecbnische Hocbscbule Zurich Prof. Dr. B. L. van der Waerden Matbematisches Institut der Universitat ZUrich Aile Rechte, insbesondere das der Obersetzung in fremde Spracben, vorbebalten Ohne ausdriickliche Genehmigung des Verlages ist es auch nicht gestattet, dieses Buch oder Teile daraus auf photomechaniscbem Wege (Photokopie, Mikrokopie) oder auf andere Art zu vervielfaltigen ISBN-13: 978-3-642-86936-5 e-ISBN-13: 978-3-642-86934-1 DOl: 10.1007/978-3-642-86934-1 © by Springer-Verlag Berlin· Heidelberg 1967 Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1%7 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 67-13537 Titel-Nr. 5l1B Preface Automatic computing has undergone drastic changes since the pioneering days of the early Fifties, one of the most obvious being that today the majority of computer programs are no longer written in machine code but in some programming language like FORTRAN or ALGOL. However, as desirable as the time-saving achieved in this way may be, still a high proportion of the preparatory work must be attributed to activities such as error estimates, stability investigations and the like, and for these no programming aid whatsoever can be of help.
  • CSE452 Fall2004 (Cheng)

    CSE452 Fall2004 (Cheng)

    CSE452 Fall2004 (Cheng) Organization of Programming Languages (CSE452) Instructor: Dr. B. Cheng Fall 2004 Organization of Programming Languages-Cheng (Fall 2004) 1 Evolution of Programming Languages ? Purpose: to give perspective of: ? where we’ve been, ? where we are, and ? where we might be going. ? Take away the mystery behind programming languages ? Fun lecture. ? Acknowledgements: R. Sebesta Organization of Programming Languages-Cheng (Fall 2004) 2 Genealogy of Common Languages Organization of Programming Languages-Cheng (Fall 2004) 3 1 CSE452 Fall2004 (Cheng) History of Programming Languages http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/P/programming_language.html Organization of Programming Languages-Cheng (Fall 2004) 4 Zuse’s Plankalkül - 1945 ? Never implemented ? Advanced data structures ? floating point, arrays, records ? Invariants Organization of Programming Languages-Cheng (Fall 2004) 5 Evolution of software architecture ? 1950s - Large expensive mainframe computers ran single programs (Batch processing) ? 1960s - Interactive programming (time-sharing) on mainframes ? 1970s - Development of Minicomputers and first microcomputers. Apple II. Early work on windows, icons, and PCs at XEROX PARC ? 1980s - Personal computer - Microprocessor, IBM PC and Apple Macintosh. Use of windows, icons and mouse ? 1990s - Client-server computing - Networking, The Internet, the World Wide Web Organization of Programming Languages-Cheng (Fall 2004) 6 2 CSE452 Fall2004 (Cheng) Pseudocodes - 1949 ? What was wrong with using machine code? ? Poor readability ?
  • Exploring Languages with Interpreters and Functional Programming Chapter 2

    Exploring Languages with Interpreters and Functional Programming Chapter 2

    Exploring Languages with Interpreters and Functional Programming Chapter 2 H. Conrad Cunningham 25 September 2018 Contents 2 Programming Paradigms 2 2.1 Chapter Introduction . .2 2.2 Abstraction . .2 2.2.1 What is abstraction? . .2 2.2.2 Kinds of abstraction . .3 2.2.3 Procedures and functions . .3 2.3 What is a Programming Paradigm? . .4 2.4 Imperative Paradigm . .4 2.5 Declarative Paradigm . .6 2.5.1 Functional paradigm . .6 2.5.2 Relational (or logic) paradigm . .8 2.6 Other Programming Paradigms . .9 2.6.1 Procedural paradigm . 10 2.6.2 Modular paradigm . 11 2.6.3 Object-based paradigms . 13 2.6.4 Concurrent paradigms . 13 2.7 Motivating Functional Programming: John Backus . 13 2.7.1 Excerpts from Backus’s Turing Award Address . 13 2.7.2 Aside on the disorderly world of statements . 16 2.7.3 Perspective from four decades later . 16 2.8 What Next? . 16 2.9 Exercises . 17 2.10 Acknowledgements . 17 2.11 References . 18 2.12 Terms and Concepts . 18 Copyright (C) 2016, 2017, 2018, H. Conrad Cunningham Professor of Computer and Information Science 1 University of Mississippi 211 Weir Hall P.O. Box 1848 University, MS 38677 (662) 915-5358 Browser Advisory: The HTML version of this textbook requires a browser that supports the display of MathML. A good choice as of September 2018 is a recent version of Firefox from Mozilla. 2 2 Programming Paradigms 2.1 Chapter Introduction The goals of this chapter are to: • introduce the concepts of procedural and data abstraction • examine the characteristics and concepts the primary programming paradigms, imperative and declarative (including functional and relational) • survey other paradigms such as procedural and modular programming 2.2 Abstraction Programming concerns the construction of appropriate abstractions in a pro- gramming language.
  • The History of the ALGOL Effort

    The History of the ALGOL Effort

    Technische Universiteit Eindhoven Department of Mathematics and Computer Science The History of the ALGOL Effort by HT de Beer supervisors: C. Hemerik L.M.M. Royakkers Eindhoven, August 2006 Abstract This report studies the importancy of the ALGOL effort for computer science. Therefore the history of the ALGOL effort is told, starting with the compu- tational context of the 1950s when the ALGOL effort was initiated. Second, the development from IAL to ALGOL 60 and the role the BNF played in this development are discussed. Third, the translation of ALGOL 60 and the establishment of the scientific field of translator writing are treated. Finally, the period of ALGOL 60 maintenance and the subsequent period of creating a successor to ALGOL 60 are described. ii Preface This history on the ALGOL effort was written as a Master thesis in Com- puter Science and Engineering (Technische Informatica) at the Eindhoven University of Technology, the Netherlands. iii Contents Abstract ii Preface iii Contents iv 0 Introduction 1 0.0 On the sources used ........................ 2 0.1 My own perspective ........................ 3 0.2 The ALGOL effort: a definition .................. 4 0.3 Notes ................................ 4 1 Creation 5 1.0 The start of the ALGOL effort ................... 5 1.1 The need for a universal algorithmic language ........... 7 1.1.0 The American field of computing ............. 7 1.1.1 The European field of computing ............. 9 1.1.2 The difference between Europe and the USA and the need for universalism ...................... 11 1.2 Why was IAL chosen over other algorithmic languages? ..... 11 1.2.0 IT ............................
  • Algol and Pascal

    Algol and Pascal

    � Topic IV � Block-structured procedural languages Algol and Pascal References: � Chapters 5 and 7, of Concepts in programming languages by J. C. Mitchell. CUP, 2003. � Chapters 10(§2) and 11(§1)of Programming languag es: Design and implementation(3 RD EDITION) by T.W. P !tt !"# M. $.%el&o'it(. P entice )all, *+++. � 74 Chapter 5of Programming languag es: Concepts & constructs by R.,ethi (2ND EDITION). -#di.on-Wesley, *++6. Chapter 7of Understanding program ming languages by M 0en-- i. Wiley, *++/. � 75 �� �� ��Parameters�� The e ! e t'o conce1t. that 23.t be cle! ly #isti"4ui.he#5 � - formal parameter i. ! #ecl! ation that !11ea . i" the #ecla !tio" of the .3bp o4 am. (The comput!tion in the body of the .ub1ro4 !2 i. ' itten in ter2. of fo mal 1! !mete ..) � -" actual parameter i. ! 6al3e that the c!lli"4 1 o4 !2 .en#. to the .3bp o4 !m. Example: Named 1! !mete !..ociatio".. No 2!lly the !ct3!l 1! !2eter. in ! .3b1 o4 !2 c!ll ! e 73.t listed !"# the matchi"4 'ith the formal 1! !meter. is do"e by � 76 1ositio"5 procedure Proc(First: Integer; Second: Character); Proc(24,’h’); I" -#! it i. 1os.ible to 3.e named association i" the c!ll: Proc(Second => ’h’, First => 24); ? What about in ML9 Can it be .i2ul!ted9 Thi. i. commo"ly 3.ed togethe 'ith default parameters5 procedure Proc(First: Integer := 0; Second: Character := ’*’); Proc(Second => ’o’); � 77 �� �� ��Parameter passing�� The '!y that !ct3al 1! !2eter. ! e e6al3ate# !"# 1!..e# to 1 oced3re.
  • Evolution of the Major Programming Languages Genealogy of Common Languages Zuse’S Plankalkül

    Evolution of the Major Programming Languages Genealogy of Common Languages Zuse’S Plankalkül

    CHAPTER 2 Evolution of the Major Programming Languages Genealogy of Common Languages Zuse’s Plankalkül • Designed in 1945, but not published until 1972 • Never implemented • Advanced data structures • floating point, arrays, records • Invariants Plankalkül Syntax • An assignment statement to assign the expression A[4] + 1 to A[5] | A + 1 => A V | 4 5 (subscripts) S | 1.n 1.n (data types) Minimal Hardware Programming: Pseudocodes • What was wrong with using machine code? • Poor readability • Poor modifiability • Expression coding was tedious • Machine deficiencies--no indexing or floating point Pseudocodes: Short Code • Short Code developed by Mauchly in 1949 for BINAC computers • Expressions were coded, left to right • Example of operations: 01 – 06 abs value 1n (n+2)nd power 02 ) 07 + 2n (n+2)nd root 03 = 08 pause 4n if <= n 04 / 09 ( 58 print and tab Pseudocodes: Speedcoding • Speedcoding developed by Backus in 1954 for IBM 701 • Pseudo ops for arithmetic and math functions • Conditional and unconditional branching • Auto-increment registers for array access • Slow! • Only 700 words left for user program Pseudocodes: Related Systems • The UNIVAC Compiling System • Developed by a team led by Grace Hopper • Pseudocode expanded into machine code • David J. Wheeler (Cambridge University) • developed a method of using blocks of re-locatable addresses to solve the problem of absolute addressing IBM 704 and Fortran • Fortran 0: 1954 - not implemented • Fortran I:1957 • Designed for the new IBM 704, which had index registers and floating point
  • Programming Languages: History and Future

    Programming Languages: History and Future

    Programming Languages: History and Future Jean E. Sammet IBM Corporation This paper discusses both the history and future of 1. Introduction programming languages (= higher level languages). Some of the difficulties in writing such a 1.1 Definition of Programming Languages history are indicated. A key part of the paper is a tree It is well known by now that there is no general showing the chronological development of languages agreement on the meaning of the term "programming and their interrelationships. Reasons for the prolifera- languages." In this paper the term is used interchange- tion of languages are given. The major languages are ably with "higher level languages," but even that does listed with the reasons for their importance. A section not solve the definition problem. Hence it is necessary on chronology indicates the happenings of the significant to specify that a programming language is considered previous time periods and the major topics of 1972. Key to be a set of characters and rules for combining them concepts other than specific languages are discussed. which have the following characteristics: (l) machine Key Words and Phrases: programming languages, code knowledge is unnecessary; (2) there is good poten- higher level languages, languages, history, future tial for conversion to other computers; (3) there is an directions, language interrelationships, programming instruction explosion (from one to many); and (4) language tree, programming language history, there is a notation which is closer to the original prob- programming language future lem than assembly language would be. CR Categories: 1.2, 4.2 1.2 Purpose and Scope of Paper Programming languages are almost as old as ACM, since the latter started in 1947 while the former started in 1952 with Short Code for UNIVAC.
  • The Algol Family And

    The Algol Family And

    The Algol family and SML INF 3040 INF - Volker Stolz 2020 [email protected] Department of Informatics – University of Oslo Initially by Gerardo Schneider. Based on John C. Mitchell’s slides (Stanford U.) 18.09.20 IN3040 – ML 1 SML lectures ! 18.09: The Algol Family and SML (Mitchell’s chap. 5) ! 25.09: More on ML & Types (chap. 5 and 6) IN3040 - ! 16.10: More on Types, Type Inference and 2020 Polymorphism (chap. 6) ! Control in sequential languages, Exceptions and Continuations (chap. 8) ! Prolog I / Prolog II 18.09.20 IN3040 – ML 1 Outline (Mitchell, Chapter 5) ! Brief overview of Algol-like programming languages Algol 60/Algol 68 • Pascal/Modula IN3040 • C - ! Basic SML 2020 ! Noteworthy this year: • You may use Haskell instead of SML in exercises and the exam! (*) • I will prepare short video snippets showing the differences. • (*) Terms and conditions apply! Don’t use Haskell-”power features”, we’ll only admit the Haskell-equivalents of SML-constructs (ie., no “do”-notation, language extensions, infinite data structure) 18.09.20 IN3040 – ML 1 A (partial) Language Sequence Lisp (McCarthy, MIT) Algol 60 late 50s Algol 68 IN3040 Simula - Pascal 2020 ML Modula Many other languages in the “family”: Algol 58, Algol W, Euclid, Ada, Simula 67, BCPL, Modula-2, Oberon, Modula-3 (DEC), Delphi, … 18.09.20 IN3040 – ML 1 Algol 60 ! Designed: 1958-1963 (J. Backus, J. McCarthy, A. Perlis,…) ! General purpose language. Features: • Simple imperative language + functions • Successful syntax, used by many successors IN3040 – Statement oriented - – begin … end blocks (like C { … } ) (local variables) 2020 – if … then … else • BNF (Backus Normal Form) – Became the standard for describing syntax • ALGOL became a standard language to describe algorithms.
  • Learning Algol 68 Genie

    Learning Algol 68 Genie

    LEARNING ALGOL 68 GENIE Algol 68 Genie 2.0.0 (September 2010) Edited by Marcel van der Veer Learning Algol 68 Genie copyright c Marcel van der Veer, 2008-2010. Algol 68 Genie copyright c Marcel van der Veer, 2001-2010. Learning Algol 68 Genie is a compilation of separate and independent documents or works, consisting of the following parts: I. Informal introduction to Algol 68, II. Programming with Algol 68 Genie, III. Example a68g programs, IV. Algol 68 Revised Report, V. Appendices Part I, II, III and V are distributed under the conditions of the GNU Free Documenta- tion License: Permission is granted to copy, distribute and / or modify the text under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled GNU Free Documentation License. See http://www.gnu.org. Part IV is a translation of the Algol 68 Revised Report into LATEX and is therefore subject to IFIP’s condition contained in that Report: Reproduction of the Report, for any purpose, but only of the whole text, is explicitly permitted without formality. Chapter 20, "Specification of partial parametrization proposal", is not a part of the Algol 68 Revised Report, and is distributed with kind permission of the author of this proposal, C.H. Lindsey. IBM is a trademark of IBM corporation. Linux is a trademark registered to Linus Torvalds. Mac OS X is a trademark of Apple Computer.
  • Dijkstra's Crisis

    Dijkstra's Crisis

    Dijkstra’s Crisis: The End of Algol and Beginning of Software Engineering, 1968-72 Thomas Haigh, [email protected], www.tomandmaria.com/tom Draft for discussion in SOFT-EU Project Meeting, September 2010 “In SHOT meetings and in the journals, it is surprising how few and far between critical references to specific historical arguments are: there is hardly any debate or even serious substantive disagreement.” – David Edgerton, 2010. In 1968 a NATO Software Engineering Conference was held in Garmisch, Germany. Attendees represented a cross section of those involved in programming work and its management. Having never met before they were shocked to realize that identical troubles plagued many different kinds of software. Participants agreed that a “software crisis” was raging. Programming projects were chronically late and over budget, yet often failed to produce useful software. They endorsed a new discipline of software engineering, its contents yet to be defined, as the solution to this crisis. A follow up conference, held in Rome the next year, failed to reach consensus on what specific techniques might constitute the core of this new discipline. Yet software engineering soon became the dominant identity to describe the work and management of programmers. That, at least, is the composite account one would gain from the almost identical paragraphs repeated again and again in historical works both scholarly and popular. But this growing mass of consensus is, I believe, built on sand. The historical significance of the 1968 NATO Conference, the demographics of its participants, its connection to prior and subsequent events, and its relationship to the software crisis are at risk of being fundamentally misinterpreted.