From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: cowan at ccil.org (John Cowan) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 19:31:36 -0500 Subject: [COFF] Algol68 (was Re: [TUHS] Were cron and at done at the same time? Or one before the other? In-Reply-To: <8D8E8160-F6F9-461A-BDFD-0E0A0E4C1A2B@iitbombay.org> References: <88E7F8CE-DC08-44AB-BF12-EFD4C5958950@iitbombay.org> <7e66e5eb-6cea-5403-a2cc-e8d93f038e66@gmail.com> <8D8E8160-F6F9-461A-BDFD-0E0A0E4C1A2B@iitbombay.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 11:35 AM Bakul Shah wrote: > Funny how we seem to rehash the same things over the years! > Ars longa, vita brevis. > In a 1988 comp.lang.misc thread when I expressed hope that "a major > subset of Algol 68 with a new and concise syntax (sort of like C's) > can make a very elegant, type safe and well rounded language.", Thanks. The URL is < https://groups.google.com/u/2/g/comp.lang.misc/c/qkmB_3zuC7Y/m/-Bk9z-oZaqYJ >. > Piet > van Oostrum[1] commented the combination of dynamic arrays *and* > unions forced the use of GC in Algol68. Either feature by themselves > wouldn't have required GC! I can't find this anywhere in the thread or elsewhere in comp.lang.misc. Do you have a reference? In any case, I don't understand how a safe language with pointers can avoid the need for *some* kind of GC. [My exposure to Algol68 was when I had stumbled upon Brailsford and > Walker's wonderful "Introductory Algol 68 programming" Alas, I can only find this at one shady site, or in hardback at Amazon for USD 20 which is a lot for a pig in a poke (no preview). John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan cowan at ccil.org "But I am the real Strider, fortunately," he said, looking down at them with his face softened by a sudden smile. "I am Aragorn son of Arathorn, and if by life or death I can save you, I will." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: