Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!mstan!amull From: amull@Morgan.COM (Andrew P. Mullhaupt) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: Late Bloomers Revisited Summary: Me too... Message-ID: <616@catfish.Morgan.COM> Date: 18 Dec 89 17:34:38 GMT References: <1TmbNv#4mK14j=eric@snark.uu.net> Organization: Morgan Stanley & Co. NY, NY Lines: 30 In article , pcg@rupert.cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes: > > In article <1TmbNv#4mK14j=eric@snark.uu.net> eric@snark.uu.net > (Eric S. Raymond) writes: > > A couple of well-informed comp.arch regulars have suggested that I may > have been a bit too peremptory in dismissing Algol68's influence on later > language development. > > Would dmr or anyone else with certain knowledge care to comment? > To Eric: I think you may have been a little hasty... | Frankly, Algol 68 is now all but dead, but if somebody, e.g. | Cambridge UK, were to release on the net, e.g. comp.sources.misc, | as freeware the Algol68{C} compiler (a *very* fine piece of | portable software) and its accessories and libraries and tools | etc..., I believe a lot of people in the USA and elsewhere could | rediscover its charms, and it could develop into a serious thing. | -- To Peter: True enough, but people are witnessing a rebirth of interest in another 'dead' language (APL). I would like a copy of that Algol68 from Cambridge if I could have one for UNIX. The most likely use would be to explore in a real environment, (i.e. 'off the blackboard') what some of the data structuring ideas of Algol68 can bring to our in-house language design efforts. Later, Andrew Mullhaupt