info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Was there ever a complete CPL compiler?
102 views
Skip to first unread message
Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
May 8, 2020, 5:46:30 PM5/8/20
to
Dear a.f.computers,
In
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/at-scientific-american/systems-analysis-look-back-1966-scientific-american-article/
Peter Norvig writes
> The first CPL compiler emerged around 1970, and by the 1980s they were
> gone.
and in
http://elearn.cs.man.ac.uk/~atlas/docs/CC_Reflections-v4%20final.pdf
George Coulouris [1] writes
> Work on a CPL compiler, dubbed the 'London CPL1 Compiler'
> began in mid-1963 and a working version was released in the
> autumn of 1964.
and later
> The London CPL1 Compiler was restricted in two ways.
> 1. Program size was restricted to a couple of hundred lines.
> 2. It had some semantic restrictions compared to the full CPL
> language.
so I ask: Is Peter Norvig correct, that there really existed full
implementations of CPL in the 70s? There are more documents in
the atlas directory above, including a source code for what I
belive is the CPL1 compiler, but I don't know for certain. And
there doesn't seem to be any definite paper, at first glance, that
verifies a later compiler existed.
[1] Or that's how I read the attribution.
--
Johann | email: invalid -> com | www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | twitter: @myrkraverk
In
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/at-scientific-american/systems-analysis-look-back-1966-scientific-american-article/
Peter Norvig writes
> The first CPL compiler emerged around 1970, and by the 1980s they were
> gone.
and in
http://elearn.cs.man.ac.uk/~atlas/docs/CC_Reflections-v4%20final.pdf
George Coulouris [1] writes
> Work on a CPL compiler, dubbed the 'London CPL1 Compiler'
> began in mid-1963 and a working version was released in the
> autumn of 1964.
and later
> The London CPL1 Compiler was restricted in two ways.
> 1. Program size was restricted to a couple of hundred lines.
> 2. It had some semantic restrictions compared to the full CPL
> language.
so I ask: Is Peter Norvig correct, that there really existed full
implementations of CPL in the 70s? There are more documents in
the atlas directory above, including a source code for what I
belive is the CPL1 compiler, but I don't know for certain. And
there doesn't seem to be any definite paper, at first glance, that
verifies a later compiler existed.
[1] Or that's how I read the attribution.
--
Johann | email: invalid -> com | www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | twitter: @myrkraverk
Bob Eager
May 9, 2020, 6:33:14 AM5/9/20
to
On Sat, 09 May 2020 05:46:25 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
I have some stuff here:
http://www.ancientgeek.org.uk/CPL/
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
I have some stuff here:
http://www.ancientgeek.org.uk/CPL/
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
May 9, 2020, 9:37:48 AM5/9/20
to
On 09/05/2020 6:33 pm, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Sat, 09 May 2020 05:46:25 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>
> I have some stuff here:
>
> http://www.ancientgeek.org.uk/CPL/
Thank you. I wanted to study the evolution of the C language, and
> On Sat, 09 May 2020 05:46:25 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>
> I have some stuff here:
>
> http://www.ancientgeek.org.uk/CPL/
these are helpful.
It does not say anything about a compiler later than the London CPL1,
which is not the full language.
Bob Eager
May 9, 2020, 10:07:15 AM5/9/20
to
On Sat, 09 May 2020 21:37:38 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
> On 09/05/2020 6:33 pm, Bob Eager wrote:
>> On Sat, 09 May 2020 05:46:25 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
>> wrote:
>>
>> I have some stuff here:
>>
>> http://www.ancientgeek.org.uk/CPL/
>
> Thank you. I wanted to study the evolution of the C language, and these
> are helpful.
>
> It does not say anything about a compiler later than the London CPL1,
> which is not the full language.
I actually started with BCPL, and it was ten years before I got into C!
> On 09/05/2020 6:33 pm, Bob Eager wrote:
>> On Sat, 09 May 2020 05:46:25 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
>> wrote:
>>
>> I have some stuff here:
>>
>> http://www.ancientgeek.org.uk/CPL/
>
> Thank you. I wanted to study the evolution of the C language, and these
> are helpful.
>
> It does not say anything about a compiler later than the London CPL1,
> which is not the full language.
Gordon Henderson
May 10, 2020, 8:48:55 AM5/10/20
to
In article <hhnroi...@mid.individual.net>,
There is this article:
https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/clive-on-history.html
and a part in it from Alan Watson (taken from an old Usenet post)
https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/alan-on-bcpl.html#cpl
which suggests CPL was never fully implemented. I've read various things that
all more or less suggest the same - ie. that CPL was a bit too ambitious for
the computers at the time and when bigger/faster systems emerged the world had moved
on (mostly to C at that time, maybe Pascal for University use for a while)
Back to BCPL - I've recently started to use it again in a retro inspired
8/16 bit computer project I'm working on. It's quite a good fit for what
I'm doing with an older CPU an smaller memory systems.
Gordon
Bob Eager <news...@eager.cx> wrote:
>On Sat, 09 May 2020 21:37:38 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>
>> On 09/05/2020 6:33 pm, Bob Eager wrote:
>>> On Sat, 09 May 2020 05:46:25 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have some stuff here:
>>>
>>> http://www.ancientgeek.org.uk/CPL/
>>
>> Thank you. I wanted to study the evolution of the C language, and these
>> are helpful.
>>
>> It does not say anything about a compiler later than the London CPL1,
>> which is not the full language.
>
>I actually started with BCPL, and it was ten years before I got into C!
Curiously I started with C ('79) before BCPl ('83)
>On Sat, 09 May 2020 21:37:38 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>
>> On 09/05/2020 6:33 pm, Bob Eager wrote:
>>> On Sat, 09 May 2020 05:46:25 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have some stuff here:
>>>
>>> http://www.ancientgeek.org.uk/CPL/
>>
>> Thank you. I wanted to study the evolution of the C language, and these
>> are helpful.
>>
>> It does not say anything about a compiler later than the London CPL1,
>> which is not the full language.
>
>I actually started with BCPL, and it was ten years before I got into C!
There is this article:
https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/clive-on-history.html
and a part in it from Alan Watson (taken from an old Usenet post)
https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/alan-on-bcpl.html#cpl
which suggests CPL was never fully implemented. I've read various things that
all more or less suggest the same - ie. that CPL was a bit too ambitious for
the computers at the time and when bigger/faster systems emerged the world had moved
on (mostly to C at that time, maybe Pascal for University use for a while)
Back to BCPL - I've recently started to use it again in a retro inspired
8/16 bit computer project I'm working on. It's quite a good fit for what
I'm doing with an older CPU an smaller memory systems.
Gordon
Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
May 10, 2020, 9:38:10 PM5/10/20
to
On 10/05/2020 8:48 pm, Gordon Henderson wrote:
> In article <hhnroi...@mid.individual.net>,
> Bob Eager <news...@eager.cx> wrote:
>> On Sat, 09 May 2020 21:37:38 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/05/2020 6:33 pm, Bob Eager wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 09 May 2020 05:46:25 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have some stuff here:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.ancientgeek.org.uk/CPL/
>>>
>>> Thank you. I wanted to study the evolution of the C language, and these
>>> are helpful.
>>>
>>> It does not say anything about a compiler later than the London CPL1,
>>> which is not the full language.
>>
>> I actually started with BCPL, and it was ten years before I got into C!
>
> Curiously I started with C ('79) before BCPl ('83)
>
> There is this article:
>
> https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/clive-on-history.html
>
> and a part in it from Alan Watson (taken from an old Usenet post)
>
> https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/alan-on-bcpl.html#cpl
>
> which suggests CPL was never fully implemented. I've read various things that
> all more or less suggest the same - ie. that CPL was a bit too ambitious for
> the computers at the time and when bigger/faster systems emerged the world had moved
> on (mostly to C at that time, maybe Pascal for University use for a while)
Thank you.
> In article <hhnroi...@mid.individual.net>,
> Bob Eager <news...@eager.cx> wrote:
>> On Sat, 09 May 2020 21:37:38 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/05/2020 6:33 pm, Bob Eager wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 09 May 2020 05:46:25 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have some stuff here:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.ancientgeek.org.uk/CPL/
>>>
>>> Thank you. I wanted to study the evolution of the C language, and these
>>> are helpful.
>>>
>>> It does not say anything about a compiler later than the London CPL1,
>>> which is not the full language.
>>
>> I actually started with BCPL, and it was ten years before I got into C!
>
> Curiously I started with C ('79) before BCPl ('83)
>
> There is this article:
>
> https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/clive-on-history.html
>
> and a part in it from Alan Watson (taken from an old Usenet post)
>
> https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/alan-on-bcpl.html#cpl
>
> which suggests CPL was never fully implemented. I've read various things that
> all more or less suggest the same - ie. that CPL was a bit too ambitious for
> the computers at the time and when bigger/faster systems emerged the world had moved
> on (mostly to C at that time, maybe Pascal for University use for a while)
I also came across this[1], a slideshow from a lecture, apparently. On
page 49 of the pdf, it says
> Cambridge never succeeded writing a working CPL compiler.
and web searches seem to indicate there's no current compiler for it
either.
[1] http://www.pvv.org/~oma/HistoryAndSpiritofC_ECC_Sep2017.pdf
> Back to BCPL - I've recently started to use it again in a retro inspired
> 8/16 bit computer project I'm working on. It's quite a good fit for what
> I'm doing with an older CPU an smaller memory systems.
robin....@gmail.com
May 10, 2020, 11:46:50 PM5/10/20
to
On Sunday, May 10, 2020 at 10:48:55 PM UTC+10, Gordon Henderson wrote:
> In article <h......@mid.individual.net>,
ALGOL 60 was implemented on DEUCE, which had 384 words
of high-speed store and a magnetic drum of 8K words.
Size of machine is unlikely to have been an issue.
> In article <h......@mid.individual.net>,
> Bob Eager <n......@eager.cx> wrote:
> >On Sat, 09 May 2020 21:37:38 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
> >
> >> On 09/05/2020 6:33 pm, Bob Eager wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 09 May 2020 05:46:25 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I have some stuff here:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.ancientgeek.org.uk/CPL/
> >>
> >> Thank you. I wanted to study the evolution of the C language, and these
> >> are helpful.
> >>
> >> It does not say anything about a compiler later than the London CPL1,
> >> which is not the full language.
> >
> >I actually started with BCPL, and it was ten years before I got into C!
>
> Curiously I started with C ('79) before BCPl ('83)
>
> There is this article:
>
> https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/clive-on-history.html
>
> and a part in it from Alan Watson (taken from an old Usenet post)
>
> https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/alan-on-bcpl.html#cpl
>
> which suggests CPL was never fully implemented. I've read various things that
> all more or less suggest the same - ie. that CPL was a bit too ambitious for
> the computers at the time
CPL was fairly similar to Algol.
> >On Sat, 09 May 2020 21:37:38 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
> >
> >> On 09/05/2020 6:33 pm, Bob Eager wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 09 May 2020 05:46:25 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I have some stuff here:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.ancientgeek.org.uk/CPL/
> >>
> >> Thank you. I wanted to study the evolution of the C language, and these
> >> are helpful.
> >>
> >> It does not say anything about a compiler later than the London CPL1,
> >> which is not the full language.
> >
> >I actually started with BCPL, and it was ten years before I got into C!
>
> Curiously I started with C ('79) before BCPl ('83)
>
> There is this article:
>
> https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/clive-on-history.html
>
> and a part in it from Alan Watson (taken from an old Usenet post)
>
> https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/alan-on-bcpl.html#cpl
>
> which suggests CPL was never fully implemented. I've read various things that
> all more or less suggest the same - ie. that CPL was a bit too ambitious for
> the computers at the time
ALGOL 60 was implemented on DEUCE, which had 384 words
of high-speed store and a magnetic drum of 8K words.
Size of machine is unlikely to have been an issue.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
May 11, 2020, 1:30:05 AM5/11/20
to
On Mon, 11 May 2020 09:37:56 +0800
Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <joh...@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote:
> > Cambridge never succeeded writing a working CPL compiler.
>
> and web searches seem to indicate there's no current compiler for it
> either.
The story among Cambridge CST students around 1980 (Clive Feather
Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <joh...@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote:
> > Cambridge never succeeded writing a working CPL compiler.
>
> and web searches seem to indicate there's no current compiler for it
> either.
and I took that course in the same year) that Martin Richards created
BCPL because CPL couldn't be implemented as designed but a stripped down
single type variant could and doing that might be a path to to a CPL
compiler.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Bob Eager
May 11, 2020, 4:13:20 AM5/11/20
to
On Sun, 10 May 2020 20:46:48 -0700, robin.vowels wrote:
> CPL was fairly similar to Algol.
> ALGOL 60 was implemented on DEUCE, which had 384 words of high-speed
> store and a magnetic drum of 8K words.
> Size of machine is unlikely to have been an issue.
I think a lot of it was due to the distributed nature of the work. It
> CPL was fairly similar to Algol.
> ALGOL 60 was implemented on DEUCE, which had 384 words of high-speed
> store and a magnetic drum of 8K words.
> Size of machine is unlikely to have been an issue.
took place in two separate universities (the joke was that CPL stodd for
'Cambridge Plus London'), and there were differences of opinion even
within one of the institutions.
(there is another joke which references Strachey, saying that CPL stood
for 'Christopher's Programming Language')
Bob Eager
May 11, 2020, 4:15:01 AM5/11/20
to
On Mon, 11 May 2020 06:14:30 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2020 09:37:56 +0800 Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
> <joh...@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> > Cambridge never succeeded writing a working CPL compiler.
>>
>> and web searches seem to indicate there's no current compiler for it
>> either.
>
> The story among Cambridge CST students around 1980 (Clive Feather
> and I took that course in the same year) that Martin Richards created
> BCPL because CPL couldn't be implemented as designed but a stripped down
> single type variant could and doing that might be a path to to a CPL
> compiler.
That is what I have always understood, and I am pretty sure I got that
> On Mon, 11 May 2020 09:37:56 +0800 Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
> <joh...@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> > Cambridge never succeeded writing a working CPL compiler.
>>
>> and web searches seem to indicate there's no current compiler for it
>> either.
>
> The story among Cambridge CST students around 1980 (Clive Feather
> and I took that course in the same year) that Martin Richards created
> BCPL because CPL couldn't be implemented as designed but a stripped down
> single type variant could and doing that might be a path to to a CPL
> compiler.
from Martin. I didn't go to Cambridge, but spent a year at Essex, where
BCPL was very strong, and worked on the pretty comprehensive Essex BCPL
compiler as part of my M.Sc.
I also ran a BCPL User Group for some years.
Gordon Henderson
May 11, 2020, 4:38:01 AM5/11/20
to
In article <502uG.333898$xa7.2...@fx24.am4>,
Not yet but it's in a more or less working state on a 65c816 CPU
with 512KB of RAM.
Background to the project started on a 65C02: https://projects.drogon.net/6502-ruby/
65816 Board picture:
https://unicorn.drogon.net/ruby816-2.jpg
CPU runs at 16Mhz.
Quick demo (taken from a B program 'back-ported' to BCPL :)
(Well, quick is relative - this takes 20 seconds to run - it's a full 32-bit implementation
of the current compiler with a cintcode VM)
GET "libhdr"
LET start() = VALOF
{
LET cx,cy,x,y,x2,y2 = ?,?,?,?,?,?
LET iter = ?
LET xmin,xmax,ymin,ymax,maxiter,dx,dy = ?,?,?,?,?,?,?
xmin := -8601
xmax := 2867
ymin := -4915
ymax := 4915
maxiter := 32
dx := (xmax-xmin)/79
dy := (ymax-ymin)/30
cy := ymin
WHILE cy <= ymax DO
{
cx := xmin
WHILE cx <= xmax DO
{
x := 0
y := 0
x2 := 0
y2 := 0
iter:=0
WHILE iter < maxiter DO
{
IF x2+y2 > 16384 THEN
BREAK
y := ((x*y)/2048)+cy
x := x2-y2+cx
x2 := (x*x)/4096
y2 := (y*y)/4096
iter := iter + 1
}
sawrch (' '+iter)
cx := cx + dx
}
sawrch ('*n')
cy := cy + dy
}
// sys (Sys_quit, 0)
RESULTIS 0
}
=== output ===
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"""""""""""""####################################""""""""""""""""
!!!!!!!!!!!!!""""""""""########################$$$$$%(&&%%$$$$$######"""""""""""
!!!!!!!!!!!!"""""""#######################$$$$$$$$%%%&)@(&&'%$$$$$######""""""""
!!!!!!!!!!""""""#######################$$$$$$$$$%%%%&'(*00*'&%%$$$$$$######"""""
!!!!!!!!!"""""######################$$$$$$$$$$%%%%&')*+2@@,)(&%%%$$$$$$#######""
!!!!!!!!""""#####################$$$$$$$$$$%%%&&&''),@@@@@@@,'&%%%%%$$$$########
!!!!!!!"""#####################$$$$$$$$$%%&''''''()*,@@@@@@@*(('&&&&&&%$$$######
!!!!!!"""###################$$$$$$$%%%%&&'*34.,+@@1@@@@@@@@@;@0@7)(()0)'%$$#####
!!!!!!"##################$$$$%%%%%%%%&&&'()@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@,(%%$$####
!!!!!"###############$$$%%%%%%%%%%%&&&'(+@-@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@=+('&%%$$###
!!!!"##########$$$$$%%&(.'''''''''''''(*,5@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@+)-&%$$###
!!!!"####$$$$$$$$%%%%&&(.2,.*+10++*)))*.>@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@2+&%$$$##
!!!!##$$$$$$$$$%%%%%&''()9?@@@@@@@@@,,-@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@-*&%$$$##
!!!!#$$$$$$$$%%%%%&,(()+1@@@@@@@@@@@@@3@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@79'%%$$$$#
!!!#$%%$$$%&&&&&''().1?2<@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@*'&%%$$$$#
!!!()**,+9652/1//35>@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@4+)'&&%%$$$$#
!!!#$%%%$%&&&&&'''()35@3?@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@)'&%%$$$$#
!!!"$$$$$$$$%%%%%%&+())+1@@@@@@@@@@@@@4@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@2&%%$$$$#
!!!!##$$$$$$$$$%%%%%&''()=<@@@@@@@@@.,-@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@/0&%$$$##
!!!!"####$$$$$$$$%%%%&&(,419*+/@+.*)))*.;@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@5)&%$$$##
!!!!"#########$$$$$$%%&(-(''''(''''''((*-4@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@4+)-&%$$###
!!!!!"###############$$$%%%%%%%%%%&&&&'(,@.@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@1+('&%%$$###
!!!!!!"##################$$$$%%%%%%%%&&&'()7@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@+'%%$$####
!!!!!!""####################$$$$$$%%%%%&&'+94/-+1@3@@@@@@@@@@@1@@))))-*'%$$#####
!!!!!!!"""#####################$$$$$$$$%%%&''''''()*,@@@@@@@*)('&&&&&&%$$$######
!!!!!!!!""""#####################$$$$$$$$$$%%%&&&''(,@@@@@@@+'&&%%%%%$$$########
!!!!!!!!!"""""######################$$$$$$$$$$%%%%&'*++3@@,))&%%%$$$$$$#######""
!!!!!!!!!!""""""#######################$$$$$$$$$%%%%&'(*..*'&%%$$$$$$######"""""
!!!!!!!!!!!""""""""#######################$$$$$$$$%%&&)@(''(%$$$$$$#####""""""""
!!!!!!!!!!!!!""""""""""#######################$$$$$$%+'&%%$$$$$######"""""""""""
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!""""""""""""#####################################""""""""""""""""
Gordon
Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <joh...@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote:
with 512KB of RAM.
Background to the project started on a 65C02: https://projects.drogon.net/6502-ruby/
65816 Board picture:
https://unicorn.drogon.net/ruby816-2.jpg
CPU runs at 16Mhz.
Quick demo (taken from a B program 'back-ported' to BCPL :)
(Well, quick is relative - this takes 20 seconds to run - it's a full 32-bit implementation
of the current compiler with a cintcode VM)
GET "libhdr"
LET start() = VALOF
{
LET cx,cy,x,y,x2,y2 = ?,?,?,?,?,?
LET iter = ?
LET xmin,xmax,ymin,ymax,maxiter,dx,dy = ?,?,?,?,?,?,?
xmin := -8601
xmax := 2867
ymin := -4915
ymax := 4915
maxiter := 32
dx := (xmax-xmin)/79
dy := (ymax-ymin)/30
cy := ymin
WHILE cy <= ymax DO
{
cx := xmin
WHILE cx <= xmax DO
{
x := 0
y := 0
x2 := 0
y2 := 0
iter:=0
WHILE iter < maxiter DO
{
IF x2+y2 > 16384 THEN
BREAK
y := ((x*y)/2048)+cy
x := x2-y2+cx
x2 := (x*x)/4096
y2 := (y*y)/4096
iter := iter + 1
}
sawrch (' '+iter)
cx := cx + dx
}
sawrch ('*n')
cy := cy + dy
}
// sys (Sys_quit, 0)
RESULTIS 0
}
=== output ===
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"""""""""""""####################################""""""""""""""""
!!!!!!!!!!!!!""""""""""########################$$$$$%(&&%%$$$$$######"""""""""""
!!!!!!!!!!!!"""""""#######################$$$$$$$$%%%&)@(&&'%$$$$$######""""""""
!!!!!!!!!!""""""#######################$$$$$$$$$%%%%&'(*00*'&%%$$$$$$######"""""
!!!!!!!!!"""""######################$$$$$$$$$$%%%%&')*+2@@,)(&%%%$$$$$$#######""
!!!!!!!!""""#####################$$$$$$$$$$%%%&&&''),@@@@@@@,'&%%%%%$$$$########
!!!!!!!"""#####################$$$$$$$$$%%&''''''()*,@@@@@@@*(('&&&&&&%$$$######
!!!!!!"""###################$$$$$$$%%%%&&'*34.,+@@1@@@@@@@@@;@0@7)(()0)'%$$#####
!!!!!!"##################$$$$%%%%%%%%&&&'()@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@,(%%$$####
!!!!!"###############$$$%%%%%%%%%%%&&&'(+@-@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@=+('&%%$$###
!!!!"##########$$$$$%%&(.'''''''''''''(*,5@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@+)-&%$$###
!!!!"####$$$$$$$$%%%%&&(.2,.*+10++*)))*.>@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@2+&%$$$##
!!!!##$$$$$$$$$%%%%%&''()9?@@@@@@@@@,,-@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@-*&%$$$##
!!!!#$$$$$$$$%%%%%&,(()+1@@@@@@@@@@@@@3@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@79'%%$$$$#
!!!#$%%$$$%&&&&&''().1?2<@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@*'&%%$$$$#
!!!()**,+9652/1//35>@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@4+)'&&%%$$$$#
!!!#$%%%$%&&&&&'''()35@3?@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@)'&%%$$$$#
!!!"$$$$$$$$%%%%%%&+())+1@@@@@@@@@@@@@4@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@2&%%$$$$#
!!!!##$$$$$$$$$%%%%%&''()=<@@@@@@@@@.,-@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@/0&%$$$##
!!!!"####$$$$$$$$%%%%&&(,419*+/@+.*)))*.;@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@5)&%$$$##
!!!!"#########$$$$$$%%&(-(''''(''''''((*-4@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@4+)-&%$$###
!!!!!"###############$$$%%%%%%%%%%&&&&'(,@.@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@1+('&%%$$###
!!!!!!"##################$$$$%%%%%%%%&&&'()7@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@+'%%$$####
!!!!!!""####################$$$$$$%%%%%&&'+94/-+1@3@@@@@@@@@@@1@@))))-*'%$$#####
!!!!!!!"""#####################$$$$$$$$%%%&''''''()*,@@@@@@@*)('&&&&&&%$$$######
!!!!!!!!""""#####################$$$$$$$$$$%%%&&&''(,@@@@@@@+'&&%%%%%$$$########
!!!!!!!!!"""""######################$$$$$$$$$$%%%%&'*++3@@,))&%%%$$$$$$#######""
!!!!!!!!!!""""""#######################$$$$$$$$$%%%%&'(*..*'&%%$$$$$$######"""""
!!!!!!!!!!!""""""""#######################$$$$$$$$%%&&)@(''(%$$$$$$#####""""""""
!!!!!!!!!!!!!""""""""""#######################$$$$$$%+'&%%$$$$$######"""""""""""
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!""""""""""""#####################################""""""""""""""""
Gordon
0 new messages