Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!uhccux!munnari.oz.au!goanna!ok
From: ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Subject: Re: Whither Headeth Scheme?
Message-ID: <4912@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au>
Date: 6 Mar 91 05:35:26 GMT
References: <3604@dali>
Organization: Comp Sci, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia
Lines: 14

In article <3604@dali>, icsu8209@attila.cs.montana.edu (Glassy) writes:
> algol-60->algol-68
>     |     |
>     |     (rebellion) algol-W->pascal->modula-{1,2}-+

Is this factually correct?  My impression was that Algol-W *preceded*
Algol 68.  I'm pretty sure it was implemented and in use before the
first Algol 68 report came out.  Pascal is not a "more bloated" language
than Algol W; Pascal has those *INSANE* fixed-size-at-compile-time arrays,
while Algol W was faithful to the Algol tradition.  The major area of
bloat in Algol 68 was formats.  Algol 68S (the official subset language)
was significantly *simpler* than Pascal.
-- 
The purpose of advertising is to destroy the freedom of the market.