Re: Languages From Hell -- your favorite one could walk again!

esr@Netaxs.com (Eric Raymond) writes:
> * Pedagogical interest. Languages conceived for textbook purposes but
> never implemented, such as Knuth's MIX or Dijkstra's unnamed language
> from "A Discipline Of Programming", would be welcome.


But Knuth's MIX _was_ implemented. When I was an undergraduate at the
University of Auckland, back when we had a Burroughs B6700, there was
a MIXAL assembler and MIX interpreter available, written in B6700 Algol.
Of course, the B6700 had the advantage of a 48-bit word.


To the best of my recollection, there was a PDP-10 version as well.


> * Evil reputation. Preference will be given to languages only spoken
> of in horrified whispers.


>Possible implementation languages for my retrocompilers and
>retrointerpreters may include C, Perl, Scheme, or Emacs Lisp. All results
>will be made publicly available in the retrocomputing archives at
>locke.ccil.org.


Don't C and Perl qualify as languages only spoken of in horrified whispers?
--
Richard A. O'Keefe; http://www.cs.rmit.edu.au/~ok; RMIT Comp.Sci.
--

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.