On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 11:53 AM, <Paul_Koning at dell.com> wrote:
PL/1 is essentially a hash of Cobol and Algol stirred by 1000 monkeys
I would have said more FORTRAN than Cobol, but I agree with your conclusion.
Clem
If I remember right, PDP-11 Algol has been mentioned on this list from time to time. That was released via DECUS, and I've seen those bits in the past. The problem always was that the runtime code (algol.rts) showed up only as a binary, no sources.
It looks like I have a copy of the sources. Would there be interest in that? This is for RSTS (as a runtime system) though the I/O is pretty simple and could presumably be adjusted for some other OS if anyone wants to.
By the way, I don't remember ever seeing a manual for the language implemented by that compiler. It turns out the best reference for that would be a manual for one of the Burroughs mainframes (say, the B5500 or B6700), which can be found on Bitsavers. The implementation actually compiles for P-code that resembles the machine code of those machines, except for using 16 bit words rather than 48/53 bit ones. The language has a number of large extensions that were taken directly from the I/O and string processing extensions in Burroughs Algol.
paul
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
The PDP-11 C compiler is a much later product than any of the stuff you talk about here. It's something DEC did in the 90s.
Fair enough - long after I was paying much attention. Do you know if it was part of GEM? The GEM suite allowed N front ends, and Y back-ends.
As for PL/1 on 16 bit machines - it was done, particularly with subset compilers. Again, I lost interest in it in the early 1980s. PL/C was Cornell's version and a number of things like Intel's PL/M for the 8080 appeared, Stanfords PL/360 etc, all show it possible,
The question really was the desire and how far you wanted to go.
Clem
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:46:34 -0500, you wrote:
How do I do multiple search paths?
-brian
On 1/15/2013 11:35 AM, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
def/use dcl$path dka0::[bin]
Never tried, but I suppose that something like the following would work:
$ DEFINE "DKA0:[first],DKA0:[second],DKA0:[third]"
Please note that if you define your logical as /USER it will disappear as soon
as you return to DCL after running whatsoever .EXE program!
G.
On 2013-01-15 17:00, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
On Jan 15, 2013, at 8:59 AM, Clem Cole wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 9:21 PM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
If there's a PDP-11 PL/I compiler, join me in benchmarking using some PL/I examples I found on kednos.com ;)
Don't think I've ever seen one. I have F4, F77, Pascal, BASIC+2, COBOL, BCPL, Simula-2, Xlisp, TECO, Forth... Possibly some other things that I can't remember now...
Focal, Coral, Jovial (gag), Mumps. Then from the outside world: Algol-60, Algol-68,...
None of which I have... :-)
Right -- Cutler did the original PL/1 compiler for the VAX only. He bought the front end from Frieberhouse (aka LPI aka Liant - aka Ryan-Marfarland). Since it was written in PL/1, Dave had to do the development at MIT on Multics until it was good enough to could self host on the VMS. At the time, there was not market need for an PL/1 for the 11 family and if my memory serves me, I think the development for the 10's and 20s was going away. PL/1 was IBM's big systems language and they were trying to move their code base from FORTRAN and Cobol to it,
As for the PDP-11 C compiler generating poor code, that's because it did not really have too as the feeling was that the Ritchie compiler for UNIX was not that good either. Any C compiler of the time was viewed as just needed to work properly, self host and generate correct code.
It would be interesting to see how GCC does with whetstone.c.
That it would... Anyone have GCC setup to generate something that can be linked under RSX?
Johnny
On 15 Jan 2013, at 10:35, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
I will try that but I doubt it'll make any difference. The cisco autodetects 100/full on both of it's virtual interfaces. The AlphaVM-free link to the localhost loopback also comes up 10/half.
Is it actually throttling it to 10/half, or is that just a side effect of the card it emulates?
-brian
On 1/15/2013 10:22 AM, Ian McLaughlin wrote:
Have you tried "duplex full" under the "interface" section in your emulated cisco?
Ian
On 2013-01-15, at 7:13 AM, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
AlphaVM-free on the laptop
GNS3 on the laptop
Running a virtual cisco 7200 with a tunnel into my "real" router doing decnet routing.
I have HECnet connectivity from the alpha! :)
$ set host 1.13
Connected to "MIM "
However, when I start DECnet I get this message:
%EWA0, Half Duplex 10BaseT connection selected
I mean, performance isn't terribly important, but I'm just curious if there was something I could do to change that. Emulated adapter on the 7200 is FE, so I wouldn't mind at least that.
-brian
---
Filter service subscribers can train this email as spam or not-spam here: http://my.email-as.net/spamham/cgi-bin/learn.pl?messageid=2ABE20D85F2611E2A…
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff!
http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet project.
On 15 Jan 2013, at 08:02, Sridhar Ayengar <ploopster at gmail.com> wrote:
sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Has anybody tried to set this up? I think it'd be nifty if we had say Hercules with MVS connected to HECnet..
If I ever get off my ass and get on HECnet, I might even be able to hook a real mainframe (at least part of the time) to the network.
Oooooh! What mainframe? ;)
Peace... Sridhar
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff!
http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet project.
defines (or assigns) are search lists. They take comma separated file specs.
On 15 January 2013 16:46, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
How do I do multiple search paths?
-brian
On 1/15/2013 11:35 AM, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
def/use dcl$path dka0::[bin]
On Jan 15, 2013, at 11:50 AM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
...
I've never seen the insides of a PL/1 compiler, but I bet it would take some work to get it to fit on a PDP-11... :-)
Johnny
Maybe so. Then again, PL/1 is essentially a hash of Cobol and Algol stirred by 1000 monkeys, so since both its ancestors fit in a PDP-11, PL/1 presumably could also. For that matter, IBM had one on the 360 that ran on a 128 kB 360/44, so the job could be done in a PDP-11 class machine.
paul
On 2013-01-15 14:59, Clem Cole wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 9:21 PM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se
<mailto:bqt at softjar.se>> wrote:
If there's a PDP-11 PL/I compiler, join me in benchmarking using
some PL/I examples I found on kednos.com <http://kednos.com> ;)
Don't think I've ever seen one. I have F4, F77, Pascal, BASIC+2,
COBOL, BCPL, Simula-2, Xlisp, TECO, Forth... Possibly some other
things that I can't remember now...
Right -- Cutler did the original PL/1 compiler for the VAX only. He
bought the front end from Frieberhouse (aka LPI aka Liant - aka
Ryan-Marfarland). Since it was written in PL/1, Dave had to do the
development at MIT on Multics until it was good enough to could self
host on the VMS. At the time, there was not market need for an PL/1 for
the 11 family and if my memory serves me, I think the development for
the 10's and 20s was going away. PL/1 was IBM's big systems language
and they were trying to move their code base from FORTRAN and Cobol to it,
As for the PDP-11 C compiler generating poor code, that's because it did
not really have too as the feeling was that the Ritchie compiler for
UNIX was not that good either. Any C compiler of the time was viewed as
just needed to work properly, self host and generate correct code. For
the users of DEC OS, folks tended to write in FORTRAN or Macro on the
11s (or BLISS if you were DEC - but you need a 10 to cross compile).
[...]
The PDP-11 C compiler is a much later product than any of the stuff you talk about here. It's something DEC did in the 90s.
As far as I know, Cutler left the PDP-11 scene back in 1974 or so. And while there, he did kernel stuff. He was not involved in any compiler stuff back then as far as I know.
I've never seen the insides of a PL/1 compiler, but I bet it would take some work to get it to fit on a PDP-11... :-)
Johnny
