Path: csiph.com!news.swapon.de!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Recursion, Yo
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:15:52 -0700
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <87cyqlqi3b.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
References: <uut24f$2icpb$1@dont-email.me> <20240411075825.30@kylheku.com> <r8TRN.114606$Wbff.54968@fx37.iad> <uva6ep$24ji7$1@dont-email.me> <uvah1j$26gtr$1@dont-email.me> <uvao71$27qit$1@dont-email.me> <uvb9r4$2c31v$1@dont-email.me> <uvcing$2kbfj$6@dont-email.me> <uveft2$346sv$1@dont-email.me> <uvf7vs$3911c$3@dont-email.me> <8734roqmdb.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <uvhm89$3s6na$2@dont-email.me> <uvi79d$2ubl$1@dont-email.me> <uvjs4c$ebsr$1@dont-email.me> <20240416231134.00004066@yahoo.com> <86edb1xtjf.fsf@linuxsc.com> <SGyUN.531$Xphd.48@fx41.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:15:52 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9cfd4108308aa1ec221847dfe3a8c5d9"; logging-data="3328644"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX187zuXDiSF38kLeuyLZtMF5"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Z35rGBokW/qVnmXBgnRQejrY4TY= sha1:lQHgJ8tEtOkYEee03AEwl4a6wXU=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:384368

scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
>>Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:36:58 +0200
>>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Algol 68 and C are so different that mutual understanding might be
>>>> difficult depending on personal background, focus, and fantasy. :-)
>>>
>>> Interesting take.
>>> I never learned Algol-68, but from pieces of info that I occasionally
>>> got I was always thinking of it as rather similar to 'C'.
>>> Both languages originated from common ancestor (Algol-60) and changed
>>> it in similar directions, e.g. blurring the line between operators and
>>> expression, making function pointers first class citizen, allowing
>>> declaration of variables at block scope.
>>> I think, in the past, when I remembered more about Algol-68, I had seen
>>> more similarities.
>>
>>Algol 60 already had block scope declarations.
>>
>>Algol 60 may not have had (pointer to) function/procedure variables,
>>but it did allow procedure identifiers as arguments to a procedure
>>call, and procedure variables are an obvious generalization.
>
> Call-by-name.  

Yes, the article you replied to already mentioned call by name, in text
that you snipped.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Medtronic
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */