Re: Algol 60 Syntax

dsutton@acumen1.com (Dan Sutton)
15 Jan 2000 14:41:06 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: Algol 60 Syntax wb@yorikke.arb-phys.uni-dortmund.de (2000-01-15)
Re: Algol 60 Syntax harm.munk@philips.com (Munk, ir. H.) (2000-01-15)
Re: Algol 60 Syntax dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu (2000-01-15)
Re: Algol 60 Syntax wclodius@aol.com (2000-01-15)
Re: Algol 60 Syntax steve.ross@rmc-ltd.com (Steve Ross) (2000-01-15)
Re: Algol 60 Syntax Martin.Ward@smltd.com (2000-01-15)
Re: Algol 60 Syntax dsutton@acumen1.com (2000-01-15)
Re: Algol 60 Syntax mah@colorado.edu (ma haibing) (2000-01-15)
Re: Algol 60 Syntax dsutton@acumen1.com (2000-01-19)
Re: Algol 60 Syntax wclodius@lanl.gov (William B. Clodius) (2000-01-21)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: dsutton@acumen1.com (Dan Sutton)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 15 Jan 2000 14:41:06 -0500
Organization: Opwernby, inc.
References: 00-01-037
Keywords: algol60, summary

Thanks to everyone for their information: I now have more varied and copious
information than I could possibly have imagined.


Dan


dsutton@acumen1.com (Dan Sutton) wrote:
>Hi, everyone.
>
>I've written a compiler which contains a parser which works by
>interpreting a Backus-Naur form syntax table, and hence, should be
>able to compile anything. ...
>
>Now then: to prove that this thing works, I want to write an Algol-60
>compiler with it, at first, basically because who the hell hasn't
>written a FORTH compiler already, anyway, and Algol-60 is about the
>simplest block-structured language I can think of (give or take that
>tricky FOR-loop construction).

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.