[cctalk] Re: Classic computers with more than one stack pointer, but not FORTH machines.

On 2/16/25 23:12, ben via cctalk wrote: Did any classic computers have a subroutine call as (S++)=PC, PC=(EFA) as well as the standard call (--S)=PC,PC=(EFA) ? One  could have a virtual stack machine, using helper functions without having to deal with return addresses on the stack. Ben. Th

[cctalk] HAWLEY X063X Mark II and XEROX Star mice

Hi all, I‘m offering HAWLEY X063X, XEROX Star rollerball and optical mice. If interested contact me offlist please. Best Andreas

[cctalk] VCF SoCal 2025 recap

Happened to be in the area, so I checked out VCF SoCal last weekend. Glad I did, wow Lee Felsenstein was able to present ! What a treat. VCF SoCal 2025 — voidstar https://voidstar.blog/vcf-socal-2025/

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On Feb 17, 2025, at 5:25 PM, Van Snyder wrote: > > On Mon, 2025-02-17 at 14:02 -0800, Paul McJones wrote: >>> On 15 Feb 2025 18:41:21 -0800,Van Snyder >> > wrote: >>> >>> Harry Husky, the G15 designer, was one of the computer design pioneers. >>> He became a pr

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On Mon, 2025-02-17 at 14:02 -0800, Paul McJones wrote: > > On 15 Feb 2025 18:41:21 -0800,Van Snyder > > wrote: > > > > Harry Husky, the G15 designer, was one of the computer design > > pioneers. > > He became a professor (maybe adjunct) at UC Berkeley.  > > As far as I know, Huskey was a regular

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On Feb 17, 2025, at 7:32 PM, Will Cooke via cctalk > wrote: > > >> On 02/17/2025 3:52 PM EST Paul Koning via cctalk >> wrote: > >> >> Indeed. There's a wonderful photo of them by Ansel Adams. Look for it; it >> shows the two of them doing a mad-genius imitation, with a random collec

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On 02/17/2025 3:52 PM EST Paul Koning via cctalk > wrote: > > Indeed. There's a wonderful photo of them by Ansel Adams. Look for it; it > shows the two of them doing a mad-genius imitation, with a random collection > of waveguides and the like in their hands. > I believe that photo is

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

Once upon a time - 35 - 45 years ago - I had the pleasure (sic) of working with: https://archive.org/details/TNM_Versatec_printers_and_plotters_-_Versatec_a_X_20180227_0009 for temperamental plots of telemetry traces https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/404623414575 manual for sale EPC Graphic Recorder 16

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On 16 Feb 2025 18:00:35 -0700,ben > wrote: > > I have trouble understanding the fine points of accessing a local > variable in Algol with a display. Books tend to spend more time > on the evils of a dangling else, and gloss over the run time action of > a display

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On 2/17/25 12:11, ben via cctalk wrote: > Is there any one working on a stand alone terminal that will > emulate hard copy over strikes?  What are people using to replace > the ageing hard copy devices paper tape and printers. I believe that this was a feature for a limited set of characters in Vi

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On 15 Feb 2025 18:41:21 -0800,Van Snyder > wrote: > > Harry Husky, the G15 designer, was one of the computer design pioneers. > He became a professor (maybe adjunct) at UC Berkeley. As far as I know, Huskey was a regular professor. Two of his Ph.D. students w

[cctalk] Re: Classic computers with more than one stack pointer, but not FORTH machines.

The PDP-8 didn't have a stack pointer at all.  Many interpreters and compilers implemented their own software stack. Architectures like the 6809 and PDP-11 and 68000 lend themselves to creating multiple software stacks. On 2/17/2025 11:56 AM, ben via cctalk wrote: On 2025-02-17 10:41 a.m., C

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On Mon, 2025-02-17 at 17:35 +, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: > > Teledeltos paper had a silver layer over a carbon layer, and a > > spark > > blew off the silver to expose the black carbon.  (I think that's > > how it > > worked, I haven't seen this stuff in decades!)  It was used in > > early

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On 2/17/25 11:38, Paul Koning wrote: > Yes, though it's possible to enable such things with condition code machines > if the setting of the condition code is selective. The Electrologica > machines have this: there is an instruction modifier bit that tells the > machine to update the condition

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On Feb 17, 2025, at 3:08 PM, Van Snyder wrote: > > On Mon, 2025-02-17 at 09:13 -0500, Paul Koning wrote: >> >>> >>> When Tom Pennello was a grad student studying under Frank de Remer at >>> ACSC, he collected a big pile of codes in languages that had nested >>> lexical and dynamic scopes (

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On Feb 17, 2025, at 2:58 PM, Van Snyder wrote: > > On Mon, 2025-02-17 at 08:53 -0500, Paul Koning wrote: >> >> >> >> >>> On Feb 16, 2025, at 7:38 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk >>> wrote: >>> >>> It also >>> had a thermal printer called "teledotis." It was very fast, so some >>> calle

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On Mon, 2025-02-17 at 09:17 -0500, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > Also multiple functional units, seriously interleaved memory, and a > bucket full of other tricks.  The way loads and stores are requested > by the programmer naturally makes them background operations, and the > "stunt box" handles

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On 2025-02-17 12:30 p.m., Paul Koning wrote: On Feb 17, 2025, at 12:04 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: On 2025-02-17 7:26 a.m., Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: ... The problem was fixed fairly well with the introduction of the DEC Multinational Character Set, which later morphed into ISO Latin-1

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On Mon, 2025-02-17 at 09:13 -0500, Paul Koning wrote: > > When Tom Pennello was a grad student studying under Frank de Remer > > at > > ACSC, he collected a big pile of codes in languages that had nested > > lexical and dynamic scopes (such as recursive internal functions). > > He > > found that ch

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On Mon, 2025-02-17 at 08:53 -0500, Paul Koning wrote: > > > > On Feb 16, 2025, at 7:38 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk > > wrote: > > > > It also > > had a thermal printer called "teledotis." It was very fast, so some > > called it the Whippet. It electrostatically deposited soot onto > > specia

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On Feb 17, 2025, at 12:30 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > > On 2/17/25 06:17, Paul Koning wrote: > >> Also multiple functional units, seriously interleaved memory, and a bucket >> full of other tricks. The way loads and stores are requested by the >> programmer naturally makes them background o

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On Feb 17, 2025, at 12:04 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: > > On 2025-02-17 7:26 a.m., Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > > ... >> The problem was fixed fairly well with the introduction of the DEC >> Multinational Character Set, which later morphed into ISO Latin-1 (with the >> curious omission

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

There was one of those in the CAD system at Acorn when I joined in about 1990, though it was fairly quickly replaced by HP plotters and laser printers (laser printers were the HP engine used in the LW4 but with our own rasterizer in an ARM-based machine). On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 5:35 PM Chuck Guzi

[cctalk] Re: Classic computers with more than one stack pointer, but not FORTH machines.

On 17/02/2025 05:12, ben via cctalk wrote: Did any classic computers have a subroutine call as (S++)=PC, PC=(EFA) as well as the standard call (--S)=PC,PC=(EFA) ? One  could have a virtual stack machine, using helper functions without having to deal with return addresses on the stack. On the m

[cctalk] Re: Classic computers with more than one stack pointer, but not FORTH machines.

Recursion is normally limited to stack depth.  On systems with limited stack space or where the recursion depth may exceed the stack size, iteration may work better. Also, many compilers can optimize loops where has optimizing recursion is a much more difficult thing.  Some optimizers can use

[cctalk] Re: Classic computers with more than one stack pointer, but not FORTH machines.

On 2025-02-17 10:41 a.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: While a hardware stack may be useful, I don't consider it to be essential and perhaps counter-productive. (dodging brickbats). A jump to subroutine is convenient , but could be omitted. I say that because if a recursive solution to a pr

[cctalk] Re: Classic computers with more than one stack pointer, but not FORTH machines.

R6 (SP) is a magic register in the PDP-11 architecture. Its use is baked into JSR, RTS, MARK, BPT, RTI, etc, traps and aborts. You are quite correct that all registers provide address inc/dec However, some instructions / actions (eg aborts) make implicit use of SP Martin -Original Message

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On 2/17/25 09:03, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote: > Teledeltos paper had a silver layer over a carbon layer, and a spark > blew off the silver to expose the black carbon.  (I think that's how it > worked, I haven't seen this stuff in decades!)  It was used in early > machines for sending weather facsi

[cctalk] Re: Classic computers with more than one stack pointer, but not FORTH machines.

While a hardware stack may be useful, I don't consider it to be essential and perhaps counter-productive. (dodging brickbats). I say that because if a recursive solution to a problem is available on a stack-oriented architecture, the natural impulse is to program a recursive solution. Lack of h

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On 2/17/25 06:17, Paul Koning wrote: > Also multiple functional units, seriously interleaved memory, and a bucket > full of other tricks. The way loads and stores are requested by the > programmer naturally makes them background operations, and the "stunt box" > handles that background process

[cctalk] Re: Classic computers with more than one stack pointer, but not FORTH machines.

On 2/17/25 08:02, Frank Leonhardt via cctalk wrote: On 17/02/2025 05:12, ben via cctalk wrote: Did any classic computers have a subroutine call as (S++)=PC, PC=(EFA) as well as the standard call (--S)=PC,PC=(EFA) ? One  could have a virtual stack machine, using helper functions without having

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On 2025-02-17 7:26 a.m., Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: I've never seen an ASCII terminal that was missing square brackets. But in theory those codes were "national use" codes, and for non-English language use they would be redefined as A with umlaut or stuff like that. This is why RSTS/E at

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On Feb 16, 2025, at 7:38 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote: It also had a thermal printer called "teledotis." It was very fast, so some called it the Whippet. It electrostatically deposited soot onto special paper, which was then fused by a heat roller. Teledeltos paper had a silver layer

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On Feb 17, 2025, at 10:36 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk > wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 09:11:17AM -0500, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > [...] >> int f1(int i) { >> int j; >> int f2(int x) { int y; y = j*2; ... f1(x+1); } >> f2(...); >> } >> f1(42); >> >> The local variables go int

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

In my case, the self-appointed gatekeeper rejected material from the AES Disk Recording Anthology. From: Ken Seefried via cctalk Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 12:55 PM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: Ken Seefried Subject: [cctalk] Re:

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 09:11:17AM -0500, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: [...] > int f1(int i) { > int j; > int f2(int x) { int y; y = j*2; ... f1(x+1); } > f2(...); > } > f1(42); > > The local variables go into stack frames, one for each call of each > func

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On Feb 17, 2025, at 7:45 AM, Frank Leonhardt via cctalk > wrote: > > On 16/02/2025 21:21, David Wade via cctalk wrote: >> On 16/02/2025 20:51, paul.kimpel--- via cctalk wrote: >>> I don't understand -- ASCII had only two versions, 1963 and 1967, and both >>> had square brackets. The IBM PC

[cctalk] Re: Classic computers with more than one stack pointer, but not FORTH machines.

> On Feb 17, 2025, at 9:02 AM, Frank Leonhardt via cctalk > wrote: > > On 17/02/2025 05:12, ben via cctalk wrote: >> Did any classic computers have a subroutine call as (S++)=PC, PC=(EFA) >> as well as the standard call (--S)=PC,PC=(EFA) ? >> One could have a virtual stack machine, using hel

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On Feb 16, 2025, at 10:39 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk > wrote: > > On 2/16/25 15:52, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: >> >> >>> On Feb 16, 2025, at 5:30 PM, paul.kimpel--- via cctalk >>> wrote: >>> >>> The question concerned good ALGOL code generation, not the feasibility of >>> ALGOL cod

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On Feb 16, 2025, at 8:03 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk > wrote: > > On Sun, 2025-02-16 at 18:52 -0500, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: >> For example, the EL-X8 has an addressing mode for resolving >> references through the "display" of static scopes in what looks like >> a single operation. >

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On Feb 16, 2025, at 8:00 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: > > ... > I have trouble understanding the fine points of accessing a local variable in > Algol with a display. Books tend to spend more time > on the evils of a dangling else, and gloss over the run time action of > a display. Displays ar

[cctalk] Re: Classic computers with more than one stack pointer, but not FORTH machines.

Probably ruled out by the "no forth" rule, the 6809 had data register stacking instruction for either the S or the extra U stack pointer PSHS | PULS | PSHU | PULU X,Y,D,CC,... and I think you could use PULU PC,... for return, just like you commonly use PULS PC,... as a quic

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

> On Feb 16, 2025, at 7:38 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk > wrote: > > It also > had a thermal printer called "teledotis." It was very fast, so some > called it the Whippet. It electrostatically deposited soot onto special > paper, which was then fused by a heat roller. I would call that an

[cctalk] Re: Classic computers with more than one stack pointer, but not FORTH machines.

On 17/02/2025 05:12, ben via cctalk wrote: Did any classic computers have a subroutine call as (S++)=PC, PC=(EFA) as well as the standard call (--S)=PC,PC=(EFA) ? One  could have a virtual stack machine, using helper functions without having to deal with return addresses on the stack. On the m

[cctalk] Re: Classic computers with more than one stack pointer, but not FORTH machines.

> On Feb 17, 2025, at 12:12 AM, ben via cctalk wrote: > > Did any classic computers have a subroutine call as (S++)=PC, PC=(EFA) > as well as the standard call (--S)=PC,PC=(EFA) ? > One could have a virtual stack machine, using helper functions without > having to deal with return addresses

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On 16/02/2025 21:21, David Wade via cctalk wrote: On 16/02/2025 20:51, paul.kimpel--- via cctalk wrote: I don't understand -- ASCII had only two versions, 1963 and 1967, and both had square brackets. The IBM PC used ASCII, but had nothing to do with its standardization. I can't find the context

[cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol

On Sat, 15 Feb 2025, Jon Elson wrote: Anyway, I got pretty frustrated, and eventually pulled the cover off the drum and discovered there were two tracks totally scored down to the brass, and a couple more that were a bit scored.  The cover on the drum was just deep drawn aluminum with caterpill