From: already5chosen@yahoo.com   
      
   On Tue, 28 Oct 2025 16:05:47 GMT   
   scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:   
      
   > David Brown  writes:   
   > >On 28/10/2025 03:00, Janis Papanagnou wrote:   
   > >> On 27.10.2025 21:39, Michael S wrote:   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>> Lua is not Algol 68.   
   > >>>   
   > >>> Correct.   
   > >>> Lua is a useful programming language.   
   > >>   
   > >> (I have no stakes here. Never used it.)   
   > >>   
   > >   
   > >It's usefulness is demonstrated by its widespread use.  It is mostly   
   > >used as a scripting or automation language integrated in other   
   > >software, rather than as a stand-alone language.  It is particularly   
   > >popular in the gaming industry.   
   > >   
   > >>> Algol 68 is a great source of inspiration for designers of   
   > >>> programming languages.   
   > >>   
   > >> Obviously.   
   > >>   
   > >>> Useful programming language it is not.   
   > >>   
   > >> I have to read that as valuation of its usefulness for you.   
   > >> (Otherwise, if you're speaking generally, you'd be just wrong.)   
   > >>   
   > >   
   > >The uselessness of Algol 68 as a programming language in the modern   
   > >world is demonstrated by the almost total non-existence of serious   
   > >tools and, more importantly, real-world code in the language.  It   
   > >certainly /was/ a useful programming language, long ago, but it has   
   > >not been seriously used outside of historical hobby interest for   
   > >half a century. And unlike other ancient languages (like Cobol or   
   > >Fortran) there is no code of relevance today written in the   
   > >language.  Original Algol was mostly used in research, while Algol   
   > >68 was mostly not used at all.  As C.A.R. Hoare said, "As a tool for   
   > >the reliable creation of sophisticated programs, the language was a   
   > >failure".   
   >   
   > There is still one computer system that uses Algol as both   
   > the system programming language, and for applications.   
   >   
   > Unisys Clearpath (descendents of the Burroughs B6500).   
   >   
      
   Is B6500 ALGOL related to A68?   
   My impression from Wikipedia article is that B5000 ALGOL was a   
   proprietary off-spring of A60. Wikipedia says nothing about sources of   
   B6500 ALGOL, but considering that Burroughs was an American enterprise   
   and that back at time in US ALGOL 68 was widely considered as a failed   
   European experiment I would guess that B6500 ALGOL is derived from   
   B5000 ALGOL rather than from A68.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)