[Info-vax] The (now lost) future of Alpha.

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 08/03/2018 06:23 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 8/3/2018 5:24 AM, invalid wrote:
>> On 2018-08-03, invalid <address at is.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2018-08-02, Arne Vajhøj <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>>> On 8/1/2018 2:10 PM, invalid wrote:
>>>>> I agree with this and anyway, Ratfor is not a compiler. It's just a
>>>>> preprocessor written for FORTRAN in PASCAL and then I think it got 
>>>>> ported to
>>>>> C. I think it's in K&R's Software Tools book.
>>>>
>>>> Pascal????
>>>>
>>>> Where did you get that idea from?
>>>
>>> I thought it was in K&R's Software Tools. I don't have the book 
>>> accessible
>>> now so I can't verify.
> 
>>>> I looked it up.
>>>>
>>>> https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1171&context=cstech 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> clearly states that RATFOR was written in RATFOR.
>>>
>>> Thanks I will check it. Sorry if what I wrote was incorrect.
>>>
>>> "Memory is the first thing to go, can't remember what the 2nd is..."
>>
>> My memory was fine and you guys didn't look far enough.
>>
>> "History
>> Ratfor was designed and implemented by Brian Kernighan at Bell 
>> Telephone Laboratories in 1974, and described in Software—Practice & 
>> Experience in 1975. It was used in the book "Software Tools" 
>> (Kernighan and Plauger, 1976).
>>
>> In 1977, at Purdue University, an improved version of the ratfor
>> preprocessor was written. It was called Mouse4, as it was smaller and 
>> faster
>> than ratfor. A published document by Dr. Douglas Comer, professor at 
>> Purdue,
>> concluded "contrary to the evidence exhibited by the designer of Ratfor,
>> sequential search is often inadequate for production software. 
>> Furthermore,
>> in the case of lexical analysis, well-known techniques do seem to offer
>> efficiency while retaining the simplicity, ease of coding and 
>> modularity of
>> ad hoc methods." (CSD-TR236)."
>>
>> See wikipedia for Ratfor
> 
> No.
> 
> It is you that did not look far enough.
> 
> The above does not say a word about Pascal.
> 
> If you actually read my link (from 1977) then you would have
> seen:
> 
> <quotes>
> ...
> The RATFOR processor, written in RATFOR, is modular, carefully
> coded, and portable, but extremely inefficient.
> ...
> A more dramatic improvement in running time was obtained by
> rewriting the ad hoc lexical scanner using a standard method
> based on finite automata. For a 3000 line source program
> the standard RATFOR required 185.470 CPU seconds on a CDC 6500
> while the automata based version needed only 12.723
> seconds.
> ...
> Additional information about RATFOR is available in the text [2],
> which includes most of the source code for RATFOR in the chapter on
> preprocessing.
> ...
> [2] Kernighan, B. and Plauger, P., Software Tools, Addison Wesley 1976.
> </quotes>
> 
> So RATFOR is in Software Tools Kernighan and Plauger 1976.
> 
> But both the original and the derivative MOUSE4 are in RATFOR.
> 
> And if you lookup the book you find:
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Software-Tools-Brian-W-Kernighan/dp/020103669X/
> 
> which says:
> 
> <quote>
> The programs are presented in a structured language called Ratfor 
> ("Rational Fortran") which can be easily understood by anyone familiar 
> with Fortran or PL/I, Algol, PASCAL, or similar languages. (Ratfor 
> translates readily into Fortran or PL/I. One of the tools presented is a 
> preprocessor to translate Ratfor into Fortran).
> </quote>
> 
> So RATFOR in RATFOR.
> 
> I suspect you are thinking about the later book "Software Tools
> in Pascal" from 1981.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Software-Tools-Pascal-Brian-Kernighan/dp/0201103427
> 
> Not sure if it has a RATFOR in Pascal. But even if it has then
> it is not the original.
> 

I can answer that as I have both copies here in front of me now.
RATFOR gets only a passing mention in "Software Tools in Pascal"
There is no RATFOR source in Pascal, thankfully.

bill