Re: Algol W

russell kym horsell <kym@svalbard.freeshell.org>
Tue, 31 Mar 2009 04:03:50 +0000 (UTC)

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Algol 68 Genie Mark 16 - An Algol 68 interpreter algol68g@xs4all.nl (Marcel van der Veer) (2009-03-24)
Re: Algol 68 Genie Mark 16 - An Algol 68 interpreter sinu.nayak2001@gmail.com (Srinu) (2009-03-24)
Re: Algol 68 Genie Mark 16 - An Algol 68 interpreter gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2009-03-24)
Re: Algol W, was Algol 68 Genie Mark 16 - An Algol 68 interpreter gdw@wave.co.nz (Glyn Webster) (2009-03-25)
Re: Algol W, was Algol 68 Genie Mark 16 - An Algol 68 interpreter gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2009-03-25)
Re: Algol W tk@ic.unicamp.br (Tomasz Kowaltowski) (2009-03-27)
Re: Algol W kym@svalbard.freeshell.org (russell kym horsell) (2009-03-31)
Re: Algol W rpw3@rpw3.org (2009-04-24)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: russell kym horsell <kym@svalbard.freeshell.org>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 04:03:50 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Central Iowa (Model) Railroad, Plano, TX, USA
References: 09-03-091 09-03-093 09-03-096 09-03-097 09-03-100 09-03-104
Keywords: algol60, history
Posted-Date: 31 Mar 2009 14:27:51 EDT

Tomasz Kowaltowski <tk@ic.unicamp.br> wrote:
} compilers-owner@lists.iecc.com wrote:
} > [Algol W was somewhere between Algol 60 and Pascal, with records and
} > defined I/O, and no call by name. It was different enough from its
} > predecessors to be called a language. -John]
} I have the impression that Algol W was designed so that it could be
} parsed using simple precedence grammars defined by Wirth and Weber as a
} generalization of operator precedence grammars.


In the 70s there was an implementation in META2 for the DECsystem10.
Boy, was META2 a can of worms. :)


Post a followup to this message

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