Then you'll like this: MicroAutocodehippy wrote:Ferranti Autocode was British, and my first introduction to programming languages courtesy of a book in the school library way back before anyone invented the micro.
SN wrote:CESIL anyone?
I have an awk script that will interpret CESIL code if anyone wants it?
Befungeredhawk wrote:lol I thought nothing could get any weirder than Prolog.![]()
Richard S.
I read the examples page of using poplog to teach computer science: there is a bit of magic sprinkled throughout those words!aaronsloman wrote:"Are there any programming languages invented and maintained in the UK or by a company/organisation that is based in the UK? If so, what are they?"
I have only just noticed this question. One of the respondents mentioned Poplog. Poplog is an interactive learning and development environment developed at Sussex University, then marketed by SDL, then ISL until ISL was bought by SPSS. It contains incremental compilers for not one but four languages: Pop-11, Prolog, Common Lisp, and Standard ML (Poplog version is PML).
----------------------------------------------------snip---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The current linux version is available here http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/research/proje ... installing
A port to Raspberry Pi would require porting the linux vesion to the ARM cpu, a non-trivial task because most of the Poplog source code, including the code for the incremental compiler, is in Pop-11, requiring a boot-strapping process.
Some teaching examples using Pop-11 are here: http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/research/proje ... /examples/ and first draft set of teaching videos (to be improved/extended) here: http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/research/proje ... rials.html
There are examples of Pop-11 code which can be compared with formulations in other languages, on the Rosettacode web site http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Category:Pop11
If anyone is interested in helping with or discussing uses of a port of Poplog to ARM+linux (which could add a powerful interactive AI language with a very small footprint, for teaching or applications, to the R-Pi), or merely wishes to know more, please email me at a.sloman[AT]cs.bham.ac.uk (school of computer science, University of Birmingham)
Thanks
Aaron Sloman
http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~axs/
Only four years later...mikio wrote:SN wrote:CESIL anyone?
I have an awk script that will interpret CESIL code if anyone wants it?
I know it's an old post but i would still like to know: what license is your awk version of cesil (gpl ?) - i love it and would love to spread it around if i could? Great fun!
I suspect you might win the prize for the oldest resurrected thread, but it's taken away again because your post is actually relevant and hence disqualified.SN wrote:Only four years later...mikio wrote:SN wrote:CESIL anyone?
I have an awk script that will interpret CESIL code if anyone wants it?
I know it's an old post but i would still like to know: what license is your awk version of cesil (gpl ?) - i love it and would love to spread it around if i could? Great fun!
I have updated the source cesil.awk file I pasted into this thread four and a half years ago to include a GPLv3 licence for reuse
You can download this version at
http://stevenicklin.com/downloads/cesil.awk
Nah- I mentioned that over 4 years ago. Do keep up at the backDub wrote:occam
I have an autographed copy of the manual for the Algol-60 compiler for the Elliott 803 signed by Tony and Jill Hoare and Jeff Hillmore
BNF (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backus%E2%80%93Naur_form) is another of those seemingly forgotten tools/techniques (like flow charts) that I still use from time to time to help with designing code.
Please don't forget Algol 68 which had an even more rigorous specification of the language (which was produced before the first compiler was implemented).
Only fair to include a quote from Tony Hoare :
To be fair to Algol that quote is referring to Algol 68. The supposedly new and improved version of Algol. Seems Tony and others considered it to be an overly complex language design and full of errors. He should know he was on the design committee. Shockingly it turns out that the committee suppressed Tony's negative report on the Algol 68 design.Only fair to include a quote from Tony Hoare :
"The best we could do was to send with it a minority report, stating our considered view that, "... as a tool for the reliable creation of sophisticated programs, the language was a failure." [...] - C. A. R. Hoare
Yes, that's why I put it after the previous post introduced Algol-68 to the thread.Heater wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2018 10:58 amPeterO,To be fair to Algol that quote is referring to Algol 68.Only fair to include a quote from Tony Hoare :
"The best we could do was to send with it a minority report, stating our considered view that, "... as a tool for the reliable creation of sophisticated programs, the language was a failure." [...] - C. A. R. Hoare
Yes, that's what the quote was about.....The supposedly new and improved version of Algol. Seems Tony and others considered it to be an overly complex language design and full of errors. He should know he was on the design committee. Shockingly it turns out that the committee suppressed Tony's negative report on the Algol 68 design.
Which isn't surprising considering it allowed him to properly describe "quicksort" for the first timeOn the other hand Tony has good things to say about the old Algol 60.
Yes, it provides an interesting insight into several aspects of computing in the 1960s. Of particular interest to me is his description of the failure to develop an operating system for the Elliott 503. Since I have experience of writing code for 503's earlier sibling (the 803.... don't ask) I can understand why it proved so difficult. The 503 did have a few extra features that would have made the task easier, but it still lacked some fundamental features that would be considered essential today (like a hardware stack and position independent code).This creeping complexity, unusability and crappiness of a programming language design as it evolves over time seems to be a common phenomena. Look at what happened as C evolved into C++ and the increasing nightmare that has become over the years. Similarly I'm worried about what has been happening to Javascript in recent years.
I'd say Algol was pioneering in that respect
Meanwhile the means of formally specifying the language syntax, Backus–Naur form, introduced with Algol, lives on in all kind of schema for things like XML and JSON and parser generators like YACC.
Tony's quote above comes from his paper "The Emperor's Old Clothes": https://gist.github.com/jfacorro/50d0b7 ... 9541302ba0 an interesting read.