我们把现在的关于算法语言ALGOL68的报告看作是在使用一种语言定义的方法于—种新设计的程序语言方面的努力的一个成果。我们把这种努力看作是一种试验。但是职业上的责任感使我们必须说出我们的观点:我们认为这个试验在以下两方面都失败了。 描述方法的失败表现在报告文字的过度简缩,正如它的作者们多次说过的那样,在报告中“每个字,每个符号都是重要的”。要想正确无误地理解它是极度困难的。使用大量的新术语以及印刷上的标新立异都是失败的明显证据。我们知道为了产生这个报告曾投入了大量的工作,但这一点反而使我们坚信,不能用“恰当”这个字眼来形容它所采用的方法。报告的内容极难理解,我们认为这是一个警告,对这个警告不能简单地说成是“初学者”的问题而置之不理。至于进一步的考察揭露了一些严重的缺点,这也是不足为怪的。 现在谈谈语言本身。这里只想从编程序的角度来考察它。在这一点上,一个程序设计语 We see the current report on ALGOL68, an algorithmic language, as a result of our efforts in using a language-defined approach to a newly designed programming language. We see this effort as a test. But a sense of professional responsibility makes us have to say our point: we think the trial failed in two ways. The failure of description methods to appear in the report text is overly curtailed, as its authors have said many times, that “every word, every symbol is important” in the report. It is extremely difficult to understand it correctly. The use of a large number of new terminology and unconventional printing is a clear indication of failure. We know that a great deal of work has been devoted to the production of this report, but this firmly convinces us that we can not use the word “appropriate” to describe the method it adopts. The content of the report is extremely difficult to understand. We consider this a warning and ignore the warning that this can not simply be described as a “beginner.” It is not surprising that further investigation revealed some serious shortcomings. Now talk about the language itself. Just want to examine it from the programming point of view. At this point, a programming language