Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.compilers > #2516

Re: Languages from the 1950s

Show key headers only | View raw

In article <20-03-030@comp.compilers>,
Derek M. Jones <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk> wrote:
>All,
>
>I looking for manuals for languages from the 1950s,
>the earlier the better.
>
>There were lots of languages around (we just don't know much
>about them today):
>http://shape-of-code.coding-guidelines.com/2017/05/21/evidence-for-28-possible-compilers-in-1957/

It's worth noting that the whole nomenclature of "assembler",
"compiler" and "interpreter" was not really established at the time --
the Laning-Zierler algebraic language for the Whirlwind (which is at
least one of the Whirlwind entries, and possibly all three) was a
compiler according to modern definitions of the word -- it generated
machine code from an input language that was mostly algebraic
expressions -- but its own documentation, here:

  http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/mit/whirlwind/E-series/E-364_A_Program_For_Translation_of_Mathematical_Equations_For_Whirlwind_I_Jan54.pdf

calls it "interpretive".  There are other systems on the list which
were implemented as what we'd call interpreters nowadays.  Mauchly's
Short Code for the Univac may be the first; it was running by 1950.
I believe Backus's Speedcoding for the 701 is also in this category.

With that in mind, I can identify quite a few entries in that list as
being what we'd call assemblers nowadays, including at least SOAP I and
II for the IBM 650, the X-1 assembler for the Univac (I and II), SAP for
the 704 (also available for the 709; see below), and at least a few of
the several "AUTOCODER"s.

There are a few other things on the list that are at least arguably
double-counting -- the IBM 709 was a mostly upward-compatible extension
of the 704 with better I/O hardware, and the FORTRAN compilers for
the two machines shared just about all of their code outside of the I/O
library.

(As a sidelight, the sheer number of FORTRAN compilers is interesting,
particularly as this happened without any formal standardization effort.
This also suggests there may be a little back-dating going on in some
of these cases.  The first of these to be released was 704 FORTRAN, and
it wasn't released until early 1957 itself; all the others must have
come later, and a compiler in those days was not a small project.)

Robert Thau
rst@ai.mit.edu
[SOAP II was definitely an assembler.  I have the manual.  It was an
"optimizing" assembler in that it tried to place instructions in
locations on the 650's drum to minimize the rotational delay. -John]

Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Languages from the 1950s "Derek M. Jones" <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk> - 2020-03-30 15:16 +0100
  Re: Languages from the 1950s anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2020-03-31 17:08 +0000
    Re: Languages from the 1950s "Derek M. Jones" <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk> - 2020-03-31 19:27 +0100
  Re: Languages from the 1950s gah4@u.washington.edu - 2020-03-31 16:09 -0700
    Re: Languages from the 1950s "Robin Vowels" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2020-04-02 13:05 +1100
  Re: Languages from the 1950s "Robin Vowels" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2020-04-01 21:31 +1100
    Re: Languages from the 1950s "Derek M. Jones" <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk> - 2020-04-01 17:35 +0100
  Re: Languages from the 1950s Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2020-04-01 17:49 +0200
  Re: Languages from the 1950s rst@panix.com (Robert Thau) - 2020-05-10 00:46 +0000
    Re: Languages from the 1950s Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2020-05-13 10:51 +0100
  Re: Languages from the 1950s "Robin Vowels" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2020-09-03 21:02 +1000

csiph-web