Well, verb order does matter, but I appreciate your point. E.g. in RPN:
1 2 3 * + => 7 1 2 3 + * => 5 On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 5:01 PM roger arrick via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Concerning notation, we actually could just set the nouns (numbers) and > set the verbs (operators) in any order. Both the programmer and the > computer know the difference. Nouns = objects, verbs = methods. > > I have a look-up ALU-based CPU design that has a register for operator, > and registers for 1 or 2 operands. What's cool about this is that you can > set the operator and just feed in a series of numbers. 74HCxx and EEPROMs. > > -- Roger Arrick -- Tyler, Texas, USA -- ro...@arrick.com -- > > ________________________________ > From: Joseph S. Barrera III via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> > Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2025 6:52 PM > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> > Cc: Joseph S. Barrera III <j...@barrera.org> > Subject: [cctalk] Re: Try Algol 68 on Windows > > > It should have been ForTran. > > OMG :-O > > Let me then suggest: > > LisP (List Processing) > > AlgoL (Algorithmic Language) > > JavaScript (Pure unadulterated marketing BS. Should have been named > something based on "LISP disguised as Java"[1].) > > > (just kidding) > > NOW you tell me. > > This is why I prefer LISP./forward-Polish-notation. First you are told what > will happen, and then you discover whom it will happen to, > As Laurie Anderson would say, it's like a prophecy. Doesn't it? Doesn't it > look? [2] > > (just-kidding (should-have-been it 'ForTran)) > > [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4t672J3PvM > > [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0lShWwy_Oc > > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 4:33 PM Chuck Guzis via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > On 1/14/25 15:31, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote: > > > > > F90 was an extension to F77 and was entirely upwardly compatible with > > > it, not an entirely new language. > > > > IMOHO, the most significant revision of the F77 standard by F90 was > > that is was acceptable to spell the last 6 letters of the language in > > lower case. (i.e. Fortran). In a way, that broke with the historical > > sense of the name. It should have been ForTran. > > > > (just kidding) > > > > F66 was important in a way, as vendor extensions had gone a bit wild. > > (e.g. punch a B in column 1 and the arithmetic operators become boolean. > > I think that was a feature in 7090 FMS/IBSYS). > > > > One defining characteristic of post-1980 languages was the assumption of > > a binary radix, as opposed to systems like the 1401 or 7070, which were > > decimal and lacked bitwise boolean operations. > > > > --Chuck > > > > > > >
