Path: csiph.com!xmission!news.snarked.org!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end From: Andy Walker Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 16:37:11 +0000 Organization: Not very much Lines: 11 Sender: news@iecc.com Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com Message-ID: <18-03-067@comp.compilers> References: <6effed5e-6c90-f5f4-0c80-a03c61fd2127@gkc.org.uk> <18-03-042@comp.compilers> <18-03-049@comp.compilers> <18-03-062@comp.compilers> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="29672"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com" Keywords: algol60, history Posted-Date: 14 Mar 2018 17:37:40 EDT X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com Content-Language: en-GB Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:2008 On 14/03/18 00:27, our moderator wrote: > [How close did anyone get to implementing Algol 58? I know about JOVIAL > but I believe it was pretty far from full IAL. -John] AFAIK, no closer than Jovial. In a sense, there never was a full IAL; the report was "preliminary", everyone was waiting for the proper language, and once Algol 60 came out, they lost interest. -- Andy Walker, Nottingham.