Re: specifying semantics, was Formatting of Language LRMs

On 6/30/2014 6:09 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jun 2014 11:49:00 -0700, Ivan Godard <ivan@ootbcomp.com>
> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> BTW, I'm talking about the VWG in the *Revised* Report, which different
>> somewhat from that in the original report before the Great Schism.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> What was this, please?


When Algol68 was revised, there was a major split in the committee as
to the merits of the proposed changes, and even more about the use of
VWG as a language notation. The majority accepted the proposal, and
their work became the Revised Report and their spiritual descendant
populate IFIPS WG2.1 (Algol) to this day.


The minority, which included a number of luminaries such as Wirth and
Dijkstra, resigned from WG2.1, wrote scathingly about the Algol68
language, and formed a rump group that became WG2.3, which also
survives. Philosophically they wished to return to (a slightly cleaned
up) Algol 60; the linguistic descendants include Pascal and Ada.


These events, known as the Great Schism, occurred slightly before I
arrived. I attended a few meetings of both WG2.1 and WG2.3 and found
the character of the two groups very different: WG2.1 had a youthful
enthusiastic, and creative feel to it, while WG2.3 seemed to be
sourpuss, political, and puffed-up: an air of offense that someone
should enter the rarefied academe without proper obeisance. That was
my feeling; others no doubt would have felt differently, and in
fairness there were many of the participants who were every bit as
welcoming as any in WG2.1. BTAIM, I quit going to WG2.3, and
eventually was honored with my name in the Revised Report.


I went on to be a founder of the next Working Group in sequence
(WG2.4, then titled Machine-Oriented Languages). Despite staying
mostly in industry, I have since encountered that WG2.3 priesthood
"feel" in some (but mercifully few) other contexts, even as recently
as this year. I suspect readers have encountered the like.

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