[TUHS] Re: mental architecture models, Anyone ever heard of teaching a case study of Initial Unix?

[James Frew <frew@ucsb.edu>]

On 2024-07-06 16:46, Peter Yardley wrote:
> There was a ‘military’ standard ForTran 66. It was more difficult to use than the various ForTran IVs, which had several niceties like string literals, but the code was at least more portable. This was about 40 years ago so details are fading.

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA328606.pdf

Not the actual standard, but the single most useful reference on porting 
old FORTRAN.

 From the Foreword:

"This FORTRAN volume presents material that will assist in understanding 
FORTRAN 66 and its replacement, FORTRAN 77. Because even a superficial 
comparison of the two language variants will involve contrasting their 
respective syntaxes, a set of FORTRAN 66 grammar rules is included: 
These rules, expressed in chart form, are comparable to rules that 
define FORTRAN 77. Next, there are two chapters of observations on what 
using standard FORTRAN 66 implies, and how the 1966 Standard is often 
interpreted and stretched to achieve practical ends. Finally, a 
comparison of the new FORTRAN 77 with FORTRAN 66 shows how the language 
has changed, and what converting older programs must entail. The four 
chapters address programmers concerned with FORTRAN conversions, 
managers engaged in programming standards, and other practitioners 
interested in system influences upon languages. Since the text touches 
upon several general programming aspects (input/output, storage 
allocation and lifetimes, control structures), the volume's appeal will 
extend beyond the immediate FORTRAN community."

Cheers,
/Frew

P.S.: If anybody cares, I have a cleaner scan that I can share.