Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<87il0ugn7b.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> Newsgroups: comp.unix.shell,comp.unix.programmer,comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2024 15:07:04 -0700 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 29 Message-ID: <87il0ugn7b.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> References: <uu54la$3su5b$6@dont-email.me> <20240329104716.777@kylheku.com> <uu8p02$uebm$1@dont-email.me> <20240330112105.553@kylheku.com> <uudrfg$2cskm$1@dont-email.me> <87r0fp8lab.fsf@tudado.org> <uuehdj$2hshe$1@dont-email.me> <87wmpg7gpg.fsf@tudado.org> <LISP-20240402085115@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <LISP-20240402091729@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <wrap-20240402092558@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <uui7hf$3gona$1@dont-email.me> <uuj1o5$3pvnq$1@dont-email.me> <87plv6jv1i.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <wwv5xwyifq8.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <if-20240404121825@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <uund4g$ugsb$1@dont-email.me> <uup8ul$1fr2t$1@dont-email.me> <uuq0a3$1lcgf$1@dont-email.me> <uuruuc$26nd1$1@dont-email.me> <uus4fe$27r8r$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2024 22:07:06 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0efa4b53af11f7d4b5690e9314ba952a"; logging-data="2446187"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/gtjitVo8k4XW5diVwZDil" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:0CTquprkwiA/W1bYnMfTM5/nK/0= sha1:Hfa0JSMQ8dAFOE5xiI34k8te0+Y= Bytes: 2824 Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> writes: > On 06/04/2024 17:57, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >> I named it always explicitly as "Algol 60" and "Algol 68". >> But at some instance of time I read somewhere that "Algol" >> would "now" refer to Algol 68, so I changed my habit. That doesn't match my experience. > Quite right. Algol 60 died, for all practical purposes, > half a century ago. Algol 68 may be a niche interest, but it is > still a nice language, and its [dwindling] band of adherents and > practitioners still use it and prefer it to C and other more > recent languages. I've never heard "Algol" by itself used to refer to Algol 68, which had enough changes to be essentially a different language, and one which didn't really replace Algol 60 (though it was clearly intended to). <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALGOL> agrees. The relative popularity of Algol 60 vs. 68 doesn't necessarily change what "Algol" means. [...] -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com Working, but not speaking, for Medtronic void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */