4 ms·
It doesn’t appear that you understood anything I said. This might be because you observably don’t know what an algorithm is. It has nothing at all intrinsicall
by User23 4y ago
It doesn’t appear that you understood anything I said.
This might be because you observably don’t know what an algorithm is. It has nothing at all intrinsically to do with call and return.
I’m afraid any further discussion will be fruitless, but on the off chance you tire of getting predictable responses to ridiculous assertions that promote what you believe to be a deep insight, then please refer back and search for the insight required to understand what you’re being told here.
- mpweiher 4y agoLet's try that again. ALGOL. The ALGOrithmic Language. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALGOL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALGOL Which is the ancestor of C (via never-completed CPL, subset to BCPL, B, then C). Which part of this are you disputing? 1. That the inventors of ALGOL knew their language well enough to choose a correct name (or knew what an algorithm is) or 2. That C is a descendant of ALGOL? You might also want to check out "The use of sub-routines in programmes", 1952 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/609784.609816 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/609784.609816 "Sub-routines seem to have two distinct uses in programmes. The first and most obvious use is for the evaluation of functions, a simple example being the evaluation of sine x given x. The second use is for the organization of processes..."
- User23 4y agoI didn’t respond regarding Algol because you said nothing of immediate relevance requiring a response. I’m familiar with the history of Algol 60. I’m not interested in regurgitating wikipedia with you. Here[1] is a good primary source on the history of programming and significance of Algol in context for you to read. Note that call/return is nowhere mentioned. Stop chasing tangents and address your core misunderstanding. Algorithms are not call and return. [1] https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD10xx/EWD1024.html https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD10xx/E...
- mpweiher 4y agoOK, thanks for clarifying that you did not understand what I wrote in the least bit and have no intention of learning, not even so far as looking at the relevant information on Wikipedia, which would help clear up your misunderstandings. Once again: ALGOL is the ALGOrithmic Language. It might have something to do with algorithms. Now please tell me what the main structuring mechanism for code is in Algol (and C, for that matter). Do you at least understand that any language derived from C is therefore also derived from ALGOL? And nobody claimed that Algorithms "are" call/return. They are just intricately related in both history and current practice, particularly once we stopped treating "primitive" operations separately and instead started understanding them as functions/procedures as well. (In C, something like multiplication is considered an operation (via the * operator), whereas most current languages treat multiplication is considered a function that the compiler understands and will directly emit machine code for). So please stop chasing tangents that have nothing to do with what I wrote and what I've done and address your core misunderstanding(s). Have a good one.
- User23 4y ago
- dang 4y agoIf you keep posting like this, we will ban you. Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32466681 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32466681.
- dang 4y agoCan you please stop breaking the site guidelines? This sort of tit-for-tat flamewar is not ok. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html