Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!teknowledge-vaxc!sri-unix!garth!phipps From: phipps@garth.UUCP (Clay Phipps) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: aGREeable features (was Re: Algol-68 down for the count) Message-ID: <2070@garth.UUCP> Date: 1 Dec 88 03:50:07 GMT References: <406@ubbpc.UUCP> <3688@hubcap.UUCP> Reply-To: phipps@garth.UUCP (Clay Phipps) Organization: INTERGRAPH (APD) -- Palo Alto, CA Lines: 42 In article <3688@hubcap.UUCP> steve@ragman writes: >From article <406@ubbpc.UUCP>, by wgh@ubbpc.UUCP (William G. Hutchison): >> Algol-60 success-1 failure-2 small group >The impact of Algol-60 on the follow[ing] designs is considerable. Indeed it is, and on its own merits. However, ... >The fact that call by name is still considered a valid question >on the advanced CS part of the GRE is some evidence. The fact that a language feature is enough of a challenge to understanding that it can be used as the basis of a test question is "evidence" to me that the feature may be more of a liability than an asset. I was "brought up" to believe that programming languages should be designed to simplify and assist construction of correct programs. I suspect that there are few features that effectively confuse students on tests that contribute to the goal of constructing correct programs. My recollection is that call-by-name was included in Algol 60 to simplify implementation of some numerical analysis algorithm like the Runge-Kutta[sp?] or Newton-Raphson (these are *not* my field), yet it was made the default parameter transmission method. I don't recall the subject algorithm being terribly difficult without call-by-name in FORTRAN. Funny thing about how call-by-name hasn't shown up in any other mainstream language, including [not being supported in] Algol-68. Is it possible that the hassles of implementing call-by-name and teaching what it does have led language designers to conclude that "'t'ain't worth it" ? >Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-1906 At the U. of Maryland, call-by-name tended to be the basis for a test question in the Survey Of Programming Languages course (CMSC 330?), typically a junior-year course for undergraduate Computer Science majors. There was no GRE at the time. -- [The foregoing may or may not represent the position, if any, of my employer] Clay Phipps {ingr,pyramid,sri-unix!hplabs}!garth!phipps