From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,86616b1931cbdae5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Brian Rogoff Subject: Re: Is Ada likely to survive ? Date: 1997/07/31 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 261085949 References: <33D005F2.E5DCD710@kaiwan.com> <33D3EC6E.7920@gsg.eds.com> <33DD01FA.247D@pseserv3.fw.hac.com> <5rnige$5d1@portal.gmu.edu> Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-07-31T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On 31 Jul 1997, Robert Dewar wrote: > Algol-68 was never successful, it was never standardized, it was never > widely used. The nearest that it came to serious use was Algol-68R at > RRE, but despite Ian's best efforts, A68 waws never really a contender, > and there were very few compilers completed. It was a sad case of a > language that was more or less DOA. (I was chair of the A68 mainteance > committee for a number of years, so I know this history well). That is sad, it seemed like a nice language on paper. I think that user definable binary operators are a very good thing, and something I haven't seen in too many other languages. The lack of generics and packages would be too much though. > SNOBOL (more specifically SPITBOL, which as you probably know I created), > is amazingly alive. I can tell you all sorts of interesting projects that > are using it. One of the most interesting is a project for creating > dictionaries of native American dialects -- a race against time, since > some of these dialects, unlike SNOBOL, are definitely dieing. How close is SPITBOL to Icon? I know a little of the latter, none of the former, although I take it they are related. Icon is definitely alive. If you'd like to answer this question by releasing the version of GNAT with the embedded SPITBOL, be my guest ;-). -- Brian