Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!think!ames!oliveb!pyramid!weitek!amdcad!light!bvs
From: bvs@light.uucp (Bakul Shah)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Algol 60 vs Algol 68 (was "stack machines (Burroughs)")
Message-ID: <1988Jun18.133008.29815@light.uucp>
Date: 18 Jun 88 20:30:05 GMT
References: <1521@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <1532@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <476@pcrat.UUCP> <2868@louie.udel.EDU> <370@dlscg1.UUCP> <3147@polyslo.UUCP> <10064@tekecs.TEK.COM> <1988Jun11.200757.12285@light.uucp> <492@ruuinf.UUCP> <125@quintus.UUCP>
Reply-To: bvs@light.UUCP (Bakul Shah)
Organization: Light Systems, Mountain View, CA
Lines: 12

In article <125@quintus.UUCP> ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe) writes:
>
>I do not understand why people claim a relationship between C and Algol 68.
>C is BCPL + Pascal types.  ...

My mistake.  I know C is based on B (based on BCPL (based on CPL].
I didn't say it well but I was wondering if any Algol 68 ideas had
influenced C.  Some private mail from people who should know seems
to indicate there was no direct influence.  My apologies for
causing any confusion.

-- Bakul Shah <..!{sun,ucbvax,pyramid}!amdcad!light!bvs>