pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson) (07/17/87)
In article <1063@theory.cs.cmu.edu> dld@theory.cs.cmu.edu (David Detlefs) writes: >Eugene mentioned that CLU was his favorite language that he didn't get >to use; it's my favorite language also, and I don't get to use it. I >think perhaps a reason we both like it is also a reason it doesn't >belong in this equivalence class: it offers garbage-collected heap >storage. In this respect it is more like a strongly typed Lisp than >it is like any of the other languages. In this discussion the terms "Algol-based" and "the Algols" keep popping up, which is unfortunate, since it puts to much kinship between Algol-60 and Algol-68 than really exists. Algol-68 was a radically new language which in concept more resembles Lisp and similar languages than Algol-60. Algol-68 has heap storage and the best typing mechanism I've seen ("types" are called "modes" and are more general than types are normally). Still, the language was conceived in the '60:s which means it is made for a batch-oriented edit-compile-load cycle. I'll rather have a Lispmachine any day... > >Missing CLU, > >Dave Kinda nostalgic about Algol-68, PD -- Per Danielsson UUCP: {mcvax,decvax,seismo}!enea!sics!pd Swedish Institute of Computer Science PO Box 1263, S-163 13 SPANGA, SWEDEN "No wife, no horse, no moustache."