This is response to a post by Eugene (I cannot send email to the email
address he uses)
:)
Apart from the fact that few russian programmers knowing of C/C++ may
be a *good thing* :) I stumbled upon a reference to the LYaPAS-M
programming language. Do you know anyhting about it? Also, I
understand that a lot of the "high level programming" done in the
former USSR was done in Algol, is it true?
Just curious
Cheers
--
Marco Antoniotti ===========================================
PARADES, Via San Pantaleo 66, I-00186 Rome, ITALY
tel. +39 - 06 68 10 03 17, fax. +39 - 06 68 80 79 26
http://www.parades.rm.cnr.it/~marcoxa
Marco Antoniotti <·······@parades.rm.cnr.it> wrote in message
···················@parades.rm.cnr.it...
>
> This is response to a post by Eugene (I cannot send email to the email
> address he uses)
>
Ouch! That's my silly anti-spam device, forgot about it completely :) Need
to make some adjustments to my sig...
BTW, my mail to you bounces too.
>
> Apart from the fact that few russian programmers knowing of C/C++ may
> be a *good thing* :)
Err.. actually I meant that most of them know C/C++ and Delphi only.
Unfortunately.
> I stumbled upon a reference to the LYaPAS-M
> programming language. Do you know anyhting about it? Also, I
I expect nothing good from a language with such stupid abbrevation :) My
wild guess is that LYa stands for "Linear Language", and PAS indicates it's
Pascal roots.
I'm sure it has nothing common with Lisp. The only native Soviet lisp
implementation was made in mid-70s for BESM-6, the original Soviet 48-bit
machine.
> understand that a lot of the "high level programming" done in the
> former USSR was done in Algol, is it true?
>
AFAIK most of programming was done with PL1/Fortran/Assembler triad. Poor
Algol was translated to Russian (!) and taught in high school as a theoretic
part of mandatory CS course.
--
Eugene
(concatenate 'string "viking" ·@" "cit.org.by")
Eugene Zaikonnikov <······@removeme.cit.org.by> wrote:
> > understand that a lot of the "high level programming" done in the
> > former USSR was done in Algol, is it true?
>
> AFAIK most of programming was done with PL1/Fortran/Assembler triad. Poor
> Algol was translated to Russian (!) and taught in high school as a theoretic
> part of mandatory CS course.
A68 specifically sought but didn't mandated localization, IIRC. I
keep the bilingual (English/Russian) "Revised Report" buried somewhere
on my bookshelves as a curious artifact of that time. The Russian
definition of "program" from RRA68 was once among my favorite quotes
(English is "program : strong void new closed clause").
A68 (in its "English" form) was popular in St.Petersburg University
and compilers were written for IBM mainframes and, later, PCs. AFAIK,
the software for Vega unmanned flight to Venus was written in A68.
There was also a project of a computer codenamed "Samson" (after the
main fountain of the Peterhof Palace complex) and all the software for
this machine was written in A68.
Students indeed were taught A68, but not as a "theoretic" langauge.
E.g. a friend of mine coauthored an assembler for the Samson machine
in A68 as his course project.
SY, Uwe
--
···@ptc.spbu.ru | Zu Grunde kommen
http://www.ptc.spbu.ru/~uwe/ | Ist zu Grunde gehen
"Valeriy E. Ushakov" wrote:
>
[snip]
> Students indeed were taught A68, but not as a "theoretic" langauge.
> E.g. a friend of mine coauthored an assembler for the Samson machine
> in A68 as his course project.
>
Well, I was referring to that "algorithmic language" which was used to
torture 9/10th grade pupils since 1986 :) That one was indeed Algol with
keywords translated to Russian. Though the "practical" part was much
worse: BASIC.
--
Eugene
(concatenate 'string "viking" ·@" "cit.org.by")
Eugene Zaikonnikov <······@cit.org.by> writes:
> "Valeriy E. Ushakov" wrote:
> >
> [snip]
> > Students indeed were taught A68, but not as a "theoretic" langauge.
> > E.g. a friend of mine coauthored an assembler for the Samson machine
> > in A68 as his course project.
> >
> Well, I was referring to that "algorithmic language" which was used to
> torture 9/10th grade pupils since 1986 :) That one was indeed Algol with
> keywords translated to Russian. Though the "practical" part was much
> worse: BASIC.
you mean FOCAL, right?
--mike, who doesn't have an AI .sig generator.
--
newsgroup volume is a measure of discontent. -- Erik Naggum
"Eugene Zaikonnikov" <······@removeme.cit.org.by> writes:
> I'm sure it has nothing common with Lisp. The only native Soviet lisp
> implementation was made in mid-70s for BESM-6, the original Soviet 48-bit
> machine.
LYaPAS may have had nothing in common with Lisp but REFAL did, and
AFAIK includes a very Lisp-like syntax using the greater-than and
less-than characters instead of parenthesis. It too had a native
implementation for the BESM-6.
Marco Antoniotti <·······@parades.rm.cnr.it> writes:
> This is response to a post by Eugene (I cannot send email to the email
> address he uses)
>
> :)
>
> Apart from the fact that few russian programmers knowing of C/C++ may
> be a *good thing* :) I stumbled upon a reference to the LYaPAS-M
> programming language. Do you know anyhting about it? Also, I
> understand that a lot of the "high level programming" done in the
> former USSR was done in Algol, is it true?
>
The former assumption (C++) is not true. I knew one of those stone-age
xUSSR programmers who was actually quite fond of Algol, he once
commented on some machine which was designed from ground up just
to handle Algol efficiently.
P.S. If not C++ than it's Java or something, the hype the money, and
ability to showoff to people who just know Pascal for instance.
--
···········@chat.ru
Malcy wrote:
> The former assumption (C++) is not true. I knew one of those stone-age
> xUSSR programmers who was actually quite fond of Algol, he once
> commented on some machine which was designed from ground up just
> to handle Algol efficiently.
You mean a Burroughs mainframe clone?
> ···········@chat.ru
Le Hibou (ma propre opinion)
--
" |
Ceci n'est pas une pipe.
"
-- Daniel B. Case.
Donald Fisk wrote:
>
> Malcy wrote:
>
> > The former assumption (C++) is not true. I knew one of those stone-age
> > xUSSR programmers who was actually quite fond of Algol, he once
> > commented on some machine which was designed from ground up just
> > to handle Algol efficiently.
>
> You mean a Burroughs mainframe clone?
>
It could be project Samson mentioned by Valery.
Despite the sad fact that most of late Soviet computer designs were just
re-engineered IBM/DEC clones, there was few original architectures,
often very interesting. BESM-6 was among the most powerful (not in terms
of consumed power :) machines of that time, Elbrus-3 in early 90's ran
number-crunching code about two times faster than Cray-Y/MP (though E3
had MTBF around 30 hours only). Vladimir Pentkovsky (not completely sure
about last name), a guy from Elbrus team, later became one of key
developers of Intel's Pentium.
In mid-80's a project of a "fifth generation computer" existed, which
was supposed to run Prolog and Lisp. AFAIK it never gone from the
drafts.
The most recent project is E2k CPU
(http://www.elbrus.ru/roadmap/e2k.html), with hardware datatypes support
(sigh). Most likely it will remain in Verilog specs: money, money, and
again money...
--
Eugene
(concatenate 'string "viking" ·@" "cit.org.by")
Marco Antoniotti wrote:
> Apart from the fact that few russian programmers knowing of C/C++ may
> be a *good thing* :) I stumbled upon a reference to the LYaPAS-M
> programming language. Do you know anyhting about it? Also, I
> understand that a lot of the "high level programming" done in the
> former USSR was done in Algol, is it true?
>
The language you are talking about (LYPAS-M) was developed in the middle
of
1970-th and is a specialized language for graph programming. It was an
original
development done by mathematicians (Novosibirsk University?) - without any
pretty
language elements. I am pretty sure it has only a historical value now.
In 1970-th Fortran and Algol were indeed very popular in USSR and they
were called
high level languages.
Regards,
Gena