Algol vs Java

[robert.hagmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Robert Hagmann)]

You sure this isn't Algol 68?  It had the operator creation stuff.  I know
that I am showing my age, but I have used (some years back) Algol 60, Algol
W, and Algol 68 -- but I just can't remember or find Algol 66.

Algol 68 was horrible.  It was like a language construction framework, and
you got to build your own language.  It was like working with someone that
used operator overloading in C++ and lots of macros, so that you could never
figure out what the code was doing.  But Algol 68 was even worse since you
were really encouraged to extend the language.  Everyone I knew that used it
hated it, and it went away.

Certainly there are many features in the Algols that are in Java.  In fact,
knowing BCPL (the parent of C -- C is just a variant), C++, Mesa, Cedar, and
Modula, there is nothing I can think of in Java that is new (except the
syntax and tweaking some features).  Mostly Java is the selection of the
stuff that was out there and putting it together in a coherent package.  

Now, don't think that I am saying that this is easy.  Java is my favorite
language, by far, because I like the selection that was made.

-- Bob


|-----Original Message-----
|From: Brendan Macmillan [mailto:bren@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
|Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 1999 8:45 AM
|To: David_Miller@xxxxxxxxx
|Cc: advanced-java@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|Subject: Algol vs Java
|
|
|> > ...But I must say that
|> > Algol-66 (from 1966) had some pretty sophisticated stuff 
|going for it
|> > (eg: operator creation, references, hidden array offsets, and named
|> > break and continue).
|> 
|> Yeah, but Algol also had the worst debugging capabilities 
|that I ever came
|> across.  Error messages consisted of " Syntax error near line 10044."
|> Of course the error was really around line 2.
|
|Yes, Java has got very description error messages - probably 
|more to do with
|improved parser technology than the language syntax itself.  
|On the other
|hand, the Java compiler doesn't always identify line correctly either.
|True, I've had no problems tracking down the error - probably because
|the description was so informative, or possibly I have learnt something
|about debugging over the years!  ;-)
|
|DIsclaimer - A lecturer here got me interested in Algol just a 
|couple of
|months ago. Whenever I mentioned an elegant feature of Java to him, he
|would comment that Algol had it years ago.  And it had still more such
|features.  Of course, I was curious as to why had never become popular,
|so I skimmed a text on it for a feel.  It's very good.  The syntax is a
|little clumsy in places compared with what I'm used to, but there are a
|lot of good ideas.  And with lex and yacc (et al), parsers would be 
|fairly straightforward to write to fix these.  Apart from lack 
|of promotion
|and bad luck, he said the specification for the language was 
|incrediably
|and needlessly technical; and from what you are saying, the 
|debugger may
|have also contributed to its non-success.  I haven't actually used an
|Algol-66 debugger.
|
|> David Miller
|
|bren@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    +61 (3)  9587 2117     tel:  +61 
|(3)  9905 5194
|Email is checked daily         voice mail         Phone is 
|rarely attended
|A giant puppy cannot imagine hardship.
|
|---
|To unsubscribe, mail advanced-java-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|To get help, mail advanced-java-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|

---
To unsubscribe, mail advanced-java-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To get help, mail advanced-java-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx