Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | palad1n's commentslogin

There seems to be multiple issues there currently…

Can confirm. There seems to be multiple issues there; my shopping lists don’t load from the top menu, as well.

I think the legend goes Wirth created the Pascal language to be the most easily compilable. To show my age, I recall a class used Modula-2 when I was in college, also from Wirth, very Pascal-like.

Nowadays you can enjoy it on GCC, as it is now an officially supported frontend, after GNU Modula-2 got merged into it.

https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-15.2.0/gm2

Even available on compiler explorer to play with, https://godbolt.org/z/ev9Pbxn9K

Yes, that was a common trend across all programming languages designed by him.

That is also how P-Code came to be, he didn't want to create a VM for Pascal, rather the goal was to make porting easier, by requiring only a basic P-Code interpreter, it was very easy to port Pascal, a design approach he kept for Modula-2 (M-Code) and Oberon (Slim binaries).


With all due respect to Wirth, P-Code did not originate in a vacuum. Martin Richards's BCPL compiler, dating from the late 1960s, targeted a hypothetical OCode machine. Furthermore, although there were backends for this that generated good machine code on popular computers of the time, Richards also had a backend that generated a severely reduced instruction set, which he called Intcode. You could write an assembler and interpreter for Intcode in a few hundred lines of Fortran (I did), which meant you could have a slow BCPL implementation on a new machine in a day or so's work, and then you could write a better backend in BCPL.

I have never been able to determine whether Wirth knew of this work, but, given that Richards's 1969 BCPL paper described OCode, I suspect he was aware of it, and that it influenced his design of the Pascal-P compiler. (I am not sure when Intcode appeared, but it was present when I obtained the BCPL compiler in 1972, a year before the Pascal-P release.)


With all due respect to Martin Richards, neither did his BCPL, given that bytecodes as idea go back to compilers being developed in 1950's after FORTRAN came to be, and was already part of CPL ideas anyway.

If fact there were all operating systems written with such ideas like Burroughs B5000 in 1961, nowadays still sold by Unisys, and thanks to this approach being easily retargeted to modern hardware.

Why this "who did it first thread?" in first place?


You had commented before I created a new account, so I will just add that I have never seen Wirth claim that he or his colleagues at ETH were the originators of the idea. Moreover, this idea was already used in Wirth’s “first” language, namely Euler, which he published in 1965 while at Stanford. An even earlier example may be Schorre’s META‑II from 1964 (UCLA).

Regarding the popular opinion here that Pascal was created for educational purposes (only) - implicitly meaning not for building real, large-scale software - Wirth considered these two characteristics equivalent, and in his view one was a necessary condition for the other.

From the summary/abstract of his original publication about Pascal (The Programming Language Pascal) written in 1970 and published in Acta Informatica in 1971:

In view of its intended usage both as a convenient basis to teach programming and as an efficient tool to write large programs, emphasis was placed on keeping the number of fundamental concepts reasonably small, on a simple and systematic language structure, and on efficient implementability.


This is interesting!

Would you mind posting links to the relevant papers?


The original paper is probably behind a paywall. But you can have a look at an excerpt (chapter 2) from the book Virtual Machines (2006) by Iain D. Craig.

https://beckassets.blob.core.windows.net/product/readingsamp...

And there's the chapter 7 in the Richard's book (1979): https://archive.org/details/richards1979bcpl/page/n131/mode/...

You will find much more information and references at the software preservation site.

https://softwarepreservation.computerhistory.org/BCPL/


Very Nice and Thank You.

Your last link (BCPL history) contains links to a lot of papers (all?) by Martin Richards one of which is (pdf) INTCODE - An Interpretive Machine Code for BCPL which i presume was what "vincent-manis" was referring to in addition to the other papers on BCPL Language/Compiler/Manuals. Seems quite comprehensive, i must say.

We really need to publicize all of Martin Richards' contributions to computer science. He seems to be one of those unsung heroes mentioned everywhere having contributed to Languages/Compilers/VMs/OSes but not that well-known.

From the site;

BCPL—the language and systems built with it—connects the first few generations of computer scientists and software engineers, spanning mainframes to minis to micros. It was driven from the UK, but with a tributary into the heart of US research institutions, where it begat C, the most popular systems programming language of all time.


I seem to remember (but I can't find the source) that Wirth initially had three aims in designing Pascal:

1. To use it in teaching a structure programming course to new students. As in the late 60's all student programming was batch mode (submit your program to an operator to run, and pick up the printout the following day), this meant the compiler had to be single-pass and give good error messages.

2. To use it in teaching a data structures course involving new data structures worked out by Wirth and Hoare.

3. To use it in teaching a compilers course. This meant the compiler code had to be clean and understandable. Being single-pass helped in this.


> most easily compilable

I think it was more that it would be easy to write a compiler for, which meant that CS students could write one. Don't have a source for this that I can remember, though.


Haha! I bought an M1 Max Macbook Pro and I maxed most of the specs. 64GB memory! (Except for the SSD, which I got the 2TB option.) I have not even THOUGHT about “upgrading” to a newer model. I have yet to even tax my system to any significant degree. Bad for Apple? How much are they worth?

THIS IS THE BEST THING EVAR!


tl;dr ask why


Yeah, what the heck happened to Gandi? It used to be my go-to, but nowadays... yikes!


They got sold to private equity, unfortunately. I switched to Bookmyname (by Scaleway) for some TLDs, and Infomaniak for others.


Wait, If I remember correctly, I think its possible to now buy domains from scaleway directly within their interface

https://www.scaleway.com/en/domain-names/

Could be very interesting for the people who love/host on scaleway.

Scaleway is a good company fwiw imo.


Can we trust Cloud registrars like Bookmyname/Scaleway, Amazon Route 53, Cloudflare more than Namecheap, Gandi and co?


I think that it's a good thing when domains aren't their main source of income. It gives them more incentive to provide good, stable experience and pricing.


More than what Gandi was? No.

More than what Gandi is now? 100%


Private equity cancer, same as Namecheap.


Reddit's r/namecheap is also full of horror stories.


Are there any other TLDs that are of this ilk or are we saying nothing but .com will ever do? Or .org, perhaps?


The ones used by freenom were particularly abused:

https://prezkennedy.com/2026/01/15/the-free-domain-trap-the-...

> Freenom’s terms of service allowed them to “cancel” a free domain at any time without warning. Users reported for years that as soon as their free site started getting significant traffic (and becoming valuable), Freenom would reclaim the domain and fill it with ads, effectively hijacking the user’s hard work.


Oh, sh!t, I used to own a .tk! Have no idea what happened to it.


At least for the last few years of Freenom, you could only get a domain for up to a year. Once that lapsed, they parked it and you had to pay to extend it further.


It's not exactly the same, but a lot of owners of weird TLDs have got hit with insane renewal fees,.hosting went from $20/y to $300/y overnight.

Also, some TLDs directly speculate on having very low prices for the first year or two, then 10x it on year 2 or 3.


Buy all 10 years you can when you get the domain. Renew yearly. When they pull silliness like this you have at least 9 years to migrate.


.com, .org have legacy contracts eliminating the shenanigans they can pull. .org did try get out of restrictions on hiking the price on renewals, but weren’t successful. So all my domains are either .com, .org or the TLD for the country where I live (of course, how trustworthy your local ccTLD is varies)


I would love a list of Radix TLDs or registrars who do this Safe Browsing ban with no appeal.

Also, go figure Namecheap works with these morons.


from their site (radix.website):

.store, .online, .tech, .site, .fun, .pw, .host, .press, .space, .uno, .website

not sure about other registrars


Some of these TLD also get thrown under weird arbitrary blacklists by security vendors.

Sorry, can’t buy a frame.work laptop because that’s a “Malicious TLD”, according to the folks at ZScaler.


This is my America. Bravo.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: