> On Jun 20, 2021, at 12:19 PM, Norman Jaffe via cctech <cct...@classiccmp.org> > wrote: > > Basically, pre-1960, there couldn't be a 'general book on programming', since > every system was a unique environment - the only languages that could even be > remotely considered to be common were ALGOL 60 and FORTRAN II... and they > were 'extended' by every manufacturer to provide, at least, some form of I/O > beyond line printers and punch card readers / punches or to support different > character sets. > Algorithms could be written in ALGOL or FORTRAN, but usually had to be > 'translated' to the particular flavour of the language provided by the > manufacturer... > [Even well past 1960, FORTRAN implementations drifted from standards... for > example, FORTRAN on the Data General Nova supported recursive functions, > something that was would cause massive problems on other systems...] > > From: "General Discussion, On-Topic Posts Only" <cct...@classiccmp.org> > To: "General Discussion, On-Topic Posts Only" <cct...@classiccmp.org> > Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2021 9:34:18 AM > Subject: Re: Early Programming Books > > Aside from the very general Algol report and the Iverson book on APL, I > have to admit that most of my programming knowledge came out of > manufacturer's manuals, specific to a maker's systems. > > The APL book was, at the time, pretty much useless for writing any sort > of serious code until you got hold of the manual for a particular system > that you were going to use. Even the early McCracken books on FORTRAN > had a section in the rear that attempted to gloss over different > manufacturer's features and "extensions" (e.g. What does "B" punched in > column 1 of a FORTRAN statement card mean--and for what system?) > > Lest anyone forget, that in the pre-1960 world, a lot more of production > code was written in the assembly code/autocoder of a particular system. > Even the DEC "Introduction to Programming" dealt specifically with the > PDP-8 and was useless for the PDP-10. > > ACM CALGO back then accepted algorithm submissions in FORTRAN or Algol, > but that's hardly an instructional text. > > I guess the question boils down to 'In the world before 1960, how > *useful* was a general book on programming?" > > --Chuck
Don’t forget about Rem Rand’s Flow-Matic compiler language for Univac I & II. -C http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/univac/flow-matic/U1518_FLOW-MATIC_Programming_System_1958.pdf <http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/univac/flow-matic/U1518_FLOW-MATIC_Programming_System_1958.pdf>
