|WikiProject Computing||(Rated Start-class)|
So how "high level" were any of the Autocodes? How "high level" was the first one? I know 1401 Autocoder is very Assembly-like, not high level. The FOLDOC says for Autocode:
- 1. The assembly language accepted by AUTOCODER.
- 2. A generic term for symbolic assembly language. Versions of Autocode were developed for Ferranti Atlas, Titan, Mercury and Pegasus and IBM 702 and IBM 705.
"Algol-like" is mentioned, which seems high level. Were these exceptional, with most being assembly-like? -R. S. Shaw 04:19, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
Titan (and IIRC Edsac) Autocode was broadly comparable with Fortran IV, without the 'orrible I/O format statements and without a facility for separate assembly of subroutines (again from memory). It did however have a 'Copy' facility for introducing lines of assembler into the program (eg the infamous 'extracodes' of Titan/Atlas). Even a thicko-physicist could use it... (I've still got my reference manual somewhere) Linuxlad 07:48, 9 May 2005 (UTC)