Chet Gardiner said "As for Algol, it was killed by the first 500 pound gorilla - IBM."
Algol was killed by its own academic exclusivity: the same fault as I critised in Fortran at the start of this thread. I say exclusivity but perhaps I mean otherworldlyness - the assumption that computers would be used by 'scientists' and their solutions published as 'algorithms'. The wiki entry ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALGOL ) illustrates my point: ...became the de facto standard way to report algorithms * in print * - (my emphasis). ALGOL 60 as officially defined had no I/O facilities - which was my comment on FORTRAN ALGOL was developed jointly by a committee of European and American computer scientists - 'nuff said! Earlier, Ed said "The fact that it was the first non-Assembler-level language was pretty significant, IMO." - certainly, and Assembler was a significant advance on machine code; but it is possible for something to be both significant and have its contribution overstated <s>. Andrew Davies MBCS CITP - AndyD 8-)# ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] with any queries. ********************************************************************** _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
