Here's a TECO "family tree" I reconstructed from various sources:
Michael Wolf wrote a faithful reimplementation of TECO 23 in C under
PDP-11 Unix in the 1970s, but I don't think it connected to anything in
your diagram.
I spent quite a while reading its code and learned a lot
from it. One distinctive thing about its style was Lisp-like layout
of closing curly braces, e.g.
if (x) {foo();
bar++;}}}}
to close several levels of braces. I mention that in case it lets you
know whether it's one you have seen.
On Tue, 12 Nov 2024, Paul Rubin wrote:
Michael Wolf wrote a faithful reimplementation of TECO 23 in C under
PDP-11 Unix in the 1970s, but I don't think it connected to anything in
your diagram.
What exactly was TECO 23? TECO-xx is usually a port to the PDP-xx.
Versions were counted per port if I understand correctly.
I spent quite a while reading its code and learned a lotLooks horrible.
from it. One distinctive thing about its style was Lisp-like layout
of closing curly braces, e.g.
if (x) {foo();
bar++;}}}}
to close several levels of braces. I mention that in case it lets you
know whether it's one you have seen.
Never seen this coding style.
What exactly was TECO 23? TECO-xx is usually a port to the PDP-xx.
Versions were counted per port if I understand correctly.
I am not counting the Emacs Lisp implementations, as they are probably (?) only toys. Emacs is in there only because people expect it to be there. Beginning with Multics Emacs, there is really no more relationship with TECO.
PS: While I am the author of a TECO dialect (SciTECO), I have never actually used any of the "historic" implementations. I know The TECO-11 dialect only from its numerous later C clones (TECOC, TECO-64, TECO for Ultrix).
There is no relation between the various Lisp implementations (really
ports) of the Emacs style of editor and the original TECO based implementation, any more than there is with the Algol implementation
AMIS, but they are hardly toys.
Robin Haberkorn <robin.haberkorn@googlemail.com> writes:
I am not counting the Emacs Lisp implementations, as they are probably (?) >> only toys. Emacs is in there only because people expect it to be there.
Beginning with Multics Emacs, there is really no more relationship with TECO.
There is no relation between the various Lisp implementations (really ports) of
the Emacs style of editor and the original TECO based implementation, any more
than there is with the Algol implementation AMIS, but they are hardly toys.
PS: While I am the author of a TECO dialect (SciTECO), I have never actually >> used any of the "historic" implementations. I know The TECO-11 dialect only >> from its numerous later C clones (TECOC, TECO-64, TECO for Ultrix).
You should have a look at the actual code of the original EMACS implementation
in TECO. That's possible on real hardware, like the Toad-2 system at SDF.org where you can get a free account. Otherwise, you're just a poser.
I think the early versions of TECO were designed for use predominantly
with quite slow printing terminals (10 cps Teletypes or even slower),
and its command set grew around that. You would enter a long editing
command specifying a complicate sequence of edits and cursor motions,
and TECO would execute them without having to noisily and slowly retype
the lines being edited. The Unix editor "ed" was sort of ok with a 30
cps printing terminal and reasonably nice with 120 cps. But it would
have been painful at 10 cps because of retyping the line so often.
TECO of course later grew screen editing features and morphed into an implementation language for editors, most notably ITS Emacs and its
later Twenex port.
I remember becoming somewhat adept at using TECO under TOPS-10, so the
PDP-11 version that I mentioned was of some interest to me. But I think
not that many people want to edit directly with TECO these days.
I think the early versions of TECO were designed for use predominantly
with quite slow printing terminals (10 cps Teletypes or even slower),
and its command set grew around that. You would enter a long editing
command specifying a complicate sequence of edits and cursor motions,
and TECO would execute them without having to noisily and slowly retype
the lines being edited. The Unix editor "ed" was sort of ok with a 30
cps printing terminal and reasonably nice with 120 cps. But it would
have been painful at 10 cps because of retyping the line so often.
If you have any kind of interesting pictures, eg. of people actually
using TECO on a PDP (whether CRT or hardcopy terminal), I would be
glad to see them (and use them with your permission).
https://github.com/rhaberkorn/sciteco/wiki/The-other-modern-TECO-implementations#teco-family-tree
Beginning with Multics Emacs, there is really no more relationship
with TECO.
On Tue, 12 Nov 2024 20:09:00 -0800, Paul Rubin wrote:
I think the early versions of TECO were designed for use predominantly
with quite slow printing terminals (10 cps Teletypes or even slower),
and its command set grew around that. You would enter a long editing
command specifying a complicate sequence of edits and cursor motions,
and TECO would execute them without having to noisily and slowly retype
the lines being edited. The Unix editor "ed" was sort of ok with a 30
cps printing terminal and reasonably nice with 120 cps. But it would
have been painful at 10 cps because of retyping the line so often.
Which was precisely why 'ed' does not print unless asked to. It's also
part of the reason why UNIX commands are silent and short.
I remember using UNIX on a 10cps terminal!
ITS Emacs and its later Twenex port.I guess that the Twenex port ran on a regular DEC TECO
Which was precisely why 'ed' does not print unless asked to. It's also
part of the reason why UNIX commands are silent and short.
I remember using UNIX on a 10cps terminal!
Anyway, wasn't the real Emacs implemented in ITS TECO, so I would have
to emulate ITS instead of TOPS-20?
On Tue, 12 Nov 2024, Paul Rubin wrote:
TECO of course later grew screen editing features and morphed into an
implementation language for editors, most notably ITS Emacs and its
later Twenex port.
I guess that the Twenex port ran on a regular DEC TECO, similar to
TECO-11? At least the Standard TECO manual mentions TOPS-20 as well.
I would be interested to include this version of the Emacs macros in my family tree. So I would branch it off TECO-11.
ITS TECO was ported to TENEX and TOPS-20 (there is no such thing as "Twenex", no matter what others might think).
Twenex was an informal and maybe slightly mocking nickname for the DEC product officially called TOPS-20.
I have found a film clip of someone using PDP-6 TECO on a 340 display.
It's probably from around 1967.
Emacs never ran on a PDP-6. ITS TECO would be PDP-6/10.
Beginning with Multics Emacs, there is really no more relationshipboth predate Multics Emacs.
Robin Haberkorn wrote:
If you have any kind of interesting pictures, eg. of people actuallyI have found a film clip of someone using PDP-6 TECO on a 340 display.
using TECO on a PDP (whether CRT or hardcopy terminal), I would be
glad to see them
It's probably from around 1967.
Would you like to share that on your Youtube channel or at least a
frame of it?
It claims that Multics Emacs was created in 1978.
Wikipedia dates EINE to the late 70s. Can we date it more precisely?
Here's a TECO "family tree" I reconstructed from various sources:
https://github.com/rhaberkorn/sciteco/wiki/The-other-modern-TECO-implementations#teco-family-tree
Wikipedia dates EINE to the late 70s. Can we date it more precisely?
Yes, since there are files from PDP-10 backup tapes in MIT archives. We
can follow Weinreb's development of a Lispm text editor. In February
1977 it started to look like Emacs. At first it had no particular name,
but in August 1977 there was this message:
DLW@MIT-AI 08/08/77 04:26:09
To: (BUG LISPM) at MIT-AI
The Lisp machine editor has now officially been named "EINE",
which stands for EINE Is Not Emacs. (Apologies to Ted Anderson,
the creator of "TINT").
I have some notes about various early Emacsen here: https://github.com/PDP-10/its/issues/1354
It's kind of amazing that in this very moment, I'm typing this in a descendant of the text editor in those clips.
* XTEC on TOPS-10 and ITS based on Stevens TECO.
That was a real actual TECO compiler!
You are on GNU Emacs I suppose?
Thanks Lars, you are doing a great job!
For my presentation, I won't go into great detail on the history of
Emacs.
It does not interest me as much and in the end I am trying to sell the
idea that it went into the wrong direction and we should all be using interactive TECOs nowadays.
Are you aware and/or will you include the story of how TECO became the preferred editor on early DEC platforms?
Are you aware and/or will you include the story of how TECO became the preferred editor on early DEC platforms? After all, TECO started as an obscure text editor on an MIT PDP-1; it was just one among many
experimental editors in use across many computers and sites.
The story goes, Bob Clements brought MIT's TECO-6 along when he
installed the Stanford AI lab PDP-6. At this point, TECO-6 was a
standalone program. During the PDP-6 acceptance tests, Clements ported
it over to the PDP-6 Monitor. It then made it back to DEC and was used
on their computers. Apparently many engineers liked it well enough to
port it to newer minicomputers like the PDP-8, 11, etc.
Compare Murphy's TECO with TECO-6: https://bitsavers.org/pdf/mit/rle_pdp1/memos/Murphy_PDP-1_TECO.pdf https://raw.githubusercontent.com/larsbrinkhoff/its-archives/master/ailab/pdp6-memo-2.pdf
5<3D ITEST$ L>
(there is no such thing as "Twenex", no matter what others might think).
... in the end I am trying to sell the
idea that it went into the wrong direction and we should all be using interactive TECOs nowadays. ;-)
On Tue, 12 Nov 2024, Paul Rubin wrote:
if (x) {foo();Looks horrible.
bar++;}}}}
Never seen this coding style.
On Thu, 14 Nov 2024, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
It's kind of amazing that in this very moment, I'm typing this in aYou are on GNU Emacs I suppose?
descendant of the text editor in those clips.
There is a modern system that does this sort of thing in a slicker
way, I think, than any ROM BASIC: that is a Jupyter notebook.
On Tue, 12 Nov 2024 20:49:07 +0300, Robin Haberkorn wrote:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2024, Paul Rubin wrote:
if (x) {foo();Looks horrible.
bar++;}}}}
Never seen this coding style.
It comes from Lisp, where it looks equally horrible.
On Thu, 14 Nov 2024 22:19:26 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
There is a modern system that does this sort of thing in a slicker way,
I think, than any ROM BASIC: that is a Jupyter notebook.
My C64's zero-to-READY. time is about three seconds. How long does it
take your machine to boot, log in, launch a browser, and load up
Jupyter? ;P
Surely Lisp is a much more versatile and extensible language than TECO. I just wish ELisp had continuations, but you canrCOt have everything. ;)
I remember as a student, a full-screen editor written in TECO, called
VTED, was very popular on our main PDP-11/70 system. Our sysadmin pointed
out that a single VTED user consumed about 10-15% of CPU time. Try scaling that across 20-30 concurrent users --- you see the problem.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
Surely Lisp is a much more versatile and extensible language than TECO.
I just wish ELisp had continuations, but you canrCOt have everything. ;)
https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/GuileEmacs
I remember that we students got the VAX on its knees when we were
working on our assignments. We had to type blind on the unresponsive terminal, and then, after maybe 20 seconds, it would react. It could run
an entire program when it switched to it, though, and fast. It just was unresponsive to the display/keyboard.
On Thu, 14 Nov 2024 10:35:08 +0300, Robin Haberkorn wrote:
On Thu, 14 Nov 2024, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
It's kind of amazing that in this very moment, I'm typing this in aYou are on GNU Emacs I suppose?
descendant of the text editor in those clips.
Nobody using XEmacs/Lucid Emacs any more? ;)
Seems like it took a while, but GNU Emacs has gradually caught up with,--
and surpassed, the fork.
MI=E2=90=9B=E2=90=9Bemm eye
This would echo on-screen as
MI$$
and so my fellow students, trying to follow my instructions by looking at
the screen output I was producing instead of what I was saying (=E2=80=9C=
escape escape=E2=80=9D, I said), would type =E2=80=9C$=E2=80=9D instead o=f pressing the ESC key,
and they would be mystified why it wouldn=E2=80=99t work.
It took them two or three attempts before I noticed what they were doing wrong ...
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 01:40:38 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
I remember that we students got the VAX on its knees when we were
working on our assignments. We had to type blind on the unresponsive
terminal, and then, after maybe 20 seconds, it would react. It could run
an entire program when it switched to it, though, and fast. It just was
unresponsive to the display/keyboard.
Was this on VMS?
See, one nice feature of VMS, that I miss on *nix systems, is that the terminal driver would not echo any user output until the program had
actually read it. So you could tell whether the program you were running
was actually responsive or not.
On Thu, 14 Nov 2024 10:34:15 +0300, Robin Haberkorn wrote:;)
... in the end I am trying to sell the
idea that it went into the wrong direction and we should all be using
interactive TECOs nowadays. ;-)
Surely Lisp is a much more versatile and extensible language than TECO. I just wish ELisp had continuations, but you can=E2=80=99t have everything.=
On Thu, 14 Nov 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:t
MI=E2=90=9B=E2=90=9B
=20
This would echo on-screen as
MI$$
=20
and so my fellow students, trying to follow my instructions by looking a=
of pressing the ESC key,the screen output I was producing instead of what I was saying (=E2=80= =9Cemm eye
escape escape=E2=80=9D, I said), would type =E2=80=9C$=E2=80=9D instead =
am=20and they would be mystified why it wouldn=E2=80=99t work.I know that of course. In all of my materials (also in SciTECO itself), I=
=20
It took them two or three attempts before I noticed what they were doing
wrong ...
=20
printing Escape and all ^x control characters in reverse (or at least in==20
bold) in order to visually highlight that they are not to be read verbati=m.
And while I had to extend the language significantly, it grew
nicely. Further extensions are planned, like floating point integers
The difficulty of getting computer time pushed me to get my first
computer (paid by my parents, of course). An Amstrad PC1512. I would
never have become proficient with programming using the Uni resources
only.
Not that you need any kind of command line termination in order to
execute macro `I` - that would happen immediately the moment you type
`I`.
In all of my materials (also in SciTECO itself),
I am printing Escape and all ^x control characters in reverse (or at
least in bold) in order to visually highlight that they are not to be
read verbatim.
You want a terse language like TECO, where the
most frequently used commands are just one or two letters/key presses.
Just like in the modern screen editors.
I mean, it's also true of nano.You want a terse language like TECO, where the
most frequently used commands are just one or two letters/key
presses. Just like in the modern screen editors.
By rCLmodern screen editorsrCY I hope you donrCOt mean the vi/vim family ...
Ah, I see. The TECO I used on the PDP-11 simply held all your input,
without executing it, until it saw the double-escape, then it ran it all. This gave you a chance to go back and correct things up to that point.
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 14:28:22 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
The difficulty of getting computer time pushed me to get my first
computer (paid by my parents, of course). An Amstrad PC1512. I would
never have become proficient with programming using the Uni resources
only.
In my day (slightly earlier than yours, with less access to our own computers), the way to get more access to the computer lab was after
hours, like in the middle of the night. You could have your choice of terminals.
I don't think our college was open at nights. There was somewhere
where they assigned our time, some paper or something. I don't
remember.
Possibly because some staff had to be there watching us.
Robin Haberkorn <robin.haberkorn@googlemail.com> writes:
And while I had to extend the language significantly, it grew
nicely. Further extensions are planned, like floating point integers
1. Floating point "integers"???
2. TECO is historically important and interesting, and I can sort of understand wanting to re-implement it as a retrocomputing hack, or maybe
even use it for nerd factor or because you were used to it. But,
extending it seems pretty niche. Does SciTECO have more than one user?
I don't think our college was open at nights.
Possibly because some staff had to be there watching us.
Ah, I see. The TECO I used on the PDP-11 simply held all your input,
without executing it, until it saw the double-escape, then it ran it all. This gave you a chance to go back and correct things up to that point.
On Sat, 16 Nov 2024 01:18:11 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
I don't think our college was open at nights.
I remember we could get keys. The labs had their own exterior doors.
Possibly because some staff had to be there watching us.
Security were on patrols. TheyrCOd come by, exchange greetings, see that we were up to no good, and then go away again.
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 22:13:03 -0000 (UTC)the vi/vim family ...
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
You want a terse language like TECO, where the
most frequently used commands are just one or two letters/key
presses. Just like in the modern screen editors.
By =E2=80=9Cmodern screen editors=E2=80=9D I hope you don=E2=80=99t mean=
I mean, it's also true of nano.
It is conventional in documentation to adopt some distinctive typesetting convention for representing control sequences, e.g. =E2=80=9CCTRL+X=E2=80==9D with boxes
around the =E2=80=9CCTRL=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CX=E2=80=9D to denote those=single keys.
You could also take advantage of modern Unicode, as I did, using U+241B SYMBOL FOR ESCAPE, =E2=80=9C=E2=90=9B=E2=80=9D for ESC. There is a whole =set of picture
representations for the ASCII control characters, including space and
delete, in the block from 0x2400 onwards. But for most of them, users
would be unlikely to remember which alphanumeric key they corresponded
to. ;)
Another problem would be to get to the college without a car, as buses
did not run during the night.
... the traditional TECO echoing of control characters has just stuck
with me.
... even ed has a terse command syntax.
You just need to track all of the state changes every command could
possibly have on the state of the editor. That's exactly what SciTECO
does.
You should have a look at the actual code of the original EMACS implement=ation
in TECO. That's possible on real hardware, like the Toad-2 system at SDF==2Eorg
where you can get a free account. Otherwise, you're just a poser.
That=E2=80=99s ... impressive. I suupose you track the state of buffer ch=anges
across loops as well? So when you delete the end of a loop, it has to und=o
it all back to the start of that, ready to run all the iterations again?
Hmmm ... what happens to any file output done in the meantime?
I don=E2=80=99t understand the point of that. Elisp is terse enough as it=is,
would you really want a more cryptic version of such custom
programming as
That is, assuming your editor language can express such things?
On Sat, 16 Nov 2024 03:03:07 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Another problem would be to get to the college without a car, as buses
did not run during the night.
Though there was this one winter night, I had neglected to check how cold
it was going to get, and I remember going home in the wee hours, shivering >in this thin pullover all the way. Later I found the overnight temperature >had got as low as 2-3-#C.
Do you know whether there was any coordination between the TECO-8,
TECO-10 and TECO-11 developments?
On Sat, 16 Nov 2024 03:03:07 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Another problem would be to get to the college without a car, as buses
did not run during the night.
Ah, this is why all the choice student accommodation was close to the University. I recall, from the block of flats I was in, there was a
shortcut across an empty section to get there even quicker.
Though there was this one winter night, I had neglected to check how cold
it was going to get, and I remember going home in the wee hours, shivering
in this thin pullover all the way. Later I found the overnight temperature had got as low as 2-3-#C.
Elisp is a scripting language. It's not the "language" you are using to
edit text directly.
... every ad-hoc scripting on the command line can - with some
discipline - be turned into a macro afterwards.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
On Sat, 16 Nov 2024 03:03:07 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Another problem would be to get to the college without a car, as buses
did not run during the night.
Though there was this one winter night, I had neglected to check how
cold it was going to get, and I remember going home in the wee hours, >>shivering in this thin pullover all the way. Later I found the overnight >>temperature had got as low as 2-3-#C.
Our computer science building was open 27x7, the coldest day walking to
the office had a wind-chill of -80F. 2C is nothing (it's currently
-2.78C here in california).
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
Ah, I see. The TECO I used on the PDP-11 simply held all your input,
without executing it, until it saw the double-escape, then it ran it
all.
This gave you a chance to go back and correct things up to that point.
Yes I'm pretty sure TOPS-10 TECO did that too.
My room an campus (for two years) was less than two minutes' walk. It was actually the nearest room on campus to the computer building.
On Sat, 16 Nov 2024 15:14:44 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
On Sat, 16 Nov 2024 03:03:07 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Another problem would be to get to the college without a car, as buses >>>> did not run during the night.
Though there was this one winter night, I had neglected to check how
cold it was going to get, and I remember going home in the wee hours, >>>shivering in this thin pullover all the way. Later I found the overnight >>>temperature had got as low as 2-3-#C.
Our computer science building was open 27x7, the coldest day walking to
the office had a wind-chill of -80F. 2C is nothing (it's currently
-2.78C here in california).
My room an campus (for two years) was less than two minutes' walk. It was >actually the nearest room on campus to the computer building.
Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> writes:
On Sat, 16 Nov 2024 15:14:44 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:I had an apartment just on the campus border, about two blocks from the
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
On Sat, 16 Nov 2024 03:03:07 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Another problem would be to get to the college without a car, as
buses did not run during the night.
Though there was this one winter night, I had neglected to check how >>>>cold it was going to get, and I remember going home in the wee hours, >>>>shivering in this thin pullover all the way. Later I found the >>>>overnight temperature had got as low as 2-3-#C.
Our computer science building was open 27x7, the coldest day walking
to the office had a wind-chill of -80F. 2C is nothing (it's
currently -2.78C here in california).
My room an campus (for two years) was less than two minutes' walk. It
was actually the nearest room on campus to the computer building.
CS building. Had an office in the adjacent Statistics building once I started working part-time for the computer center starting my sophmore
year. Convenient place to leave books during between classes.
The campus buildings were heated with steam generated at the university
power plant, so there were tunnels connecting all the buildings on
campus. Exploring the tunnel system was a common passtime in those
days (today, I would expect to find far too many cameras), and with the
CS building open 24x7, it was a convenient starting point to avoid
entering through visible manholes.
I am not counting the Emacs Lisp implementations,
as they are probably (?) only toys.
Interesting: I only know of one ELisp implementation
Stefan Monnier wrote:
Interesting: I only know of one ELisp implementationEmacs Lisp
Rutgers University Extended Addressing Lisp
CCA Emacs Elisp
Robin Haberkorn <robin.haberkorn@googlemail.com> writes:
I am not counting the Emacs Lisp implementations, as they are probably (?) >> only toys. Emacs is in there only because people expect it to be there.
Beginning with Multics Emacs, there is really no more relationship with TECO.
There is no relation between the various Lisp implementations (really ports) of
the Emacs style of editor and the original TECO based implementation, any more
than there is with the Algol implementation AMIS, but they are hardly toys.
Do you know whether there was any coordination between the TECO-8,
TECO-10 and TECO-11 developments? I have the impression they lived their
own lifes until somebody decided to write the "Standard TECO" manual.
After all, these would have been separate codebases as well.
The codebases are indeed completely separate.
But there was a committe of sorts I gather, which tried to define a "standard
TECO" at DEC. And that also is connected to that manual.
Not sure when that effort started, and how much work was going on independently on the different implementations before that.
But it seems likely that the standards committe came about because of the differences in the different implementations. Hmm, it might even have been a section in the manual that told some of the backstory. Check there?
On 2024-11-12 21:55, Rich Alderson wrote:
There is no relation between the various Lisp implementations (really ports) >> of the Emacs style of editor and the original TECO based implementation, any >> more than there is with the Algol implementation AMIS, but they are hardly >> toys.
Nitpick: AMIS is written in PASCAL. :-)
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024, Johnny Billquist wrote:
The codebases are indeed completely separate.The only hint in the manual may be "Copyright (C) 1979, 1985 TECO SIG", which means that the "TECO Special Interest Group" -- you know that one
But there was a committe of sorts I gather, which tried to define a
"standard TECO" at DEC. And that also is connected to that manual.
Not sure when that effort started, and how much work was going on
independently on the different implementations before that.
But it seems likely that the standards committe came about because of
the differences in the different implementations. Hmm, it might even
have been a section in the manual that told some of the backstory.
Check there?
that also issued the "Moby Munger" -- was involved.
The manual mentions lots of commands that are specific to one version of TECO or another. At one point it mentions that only the common subset of
all TECOs should be called "Standard TECO" (p.23). I do not have the impression that this "standard" was designed. My guess is that's just
what all have inherited from the original Bob Clemens DEC port for
PDP-6, including some interpollination within DEC.
It's interesting that the defacto "standard" still turned out to be
TECO-11, which is what all "modern" implementations of TECO appear to
clone.
TECO-32 for VMS already added nothing new, right?
Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> writes:
On 2024-11-12 21:55, Rich Alderson wrote:
There is no relation between the various Lisp implementations (really ports)
of the Emacs style of editor and the original TECO based implementation, any
more than there is with the Algol implementation AMIS, but they are hardly >>> toys.
Nitpick: AMIS is written in PASCAL. :-)
I occasionally used AMIS on the Dec-10 at the museum, until I switched to using
(DEC) TECO all the time on that machine.
An old friend in the 36 bit world used it all the time at the Colorado School of Mines, and is the one who told me that it was written in Algol.
AMIS is pretty decent, I think. Used it a lot back in the day on
RSTS/E and Tops-10.
Johnny Billquist wrote:
AMIS is pretty decent, I think. Used it a lot back in the day on
RSTS/E and Tops-10.
The AMIS source code I know about has a bunch of MACRO-10 files.
It would be interesting to see AMIS for PDP-11 or other machines.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 70 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 03:50:21 |
| Calls: | 949 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,325 |
| Messages: | 281,242 |