That's it! Much thanks!
Arnold
Paul McJones <paul(a)mcjones.org> wrote:
On Aug 17, 2017, arnold(a)skeeve.com wrote:
I remember reading an article somewhere on the
history of the first
FORTRAN compiler. The guys doing it wanted it to succeed, and they
were fighting the mentality that high level languages could not possibly
be as efficient as hand-coded assembly, so they put a lot of work into
the optimization of the generated code.
It worked so well that the results that came out of the compiler
sometimes suprised the compiler writers! They then would have to
dive into the compiler sources to figure out how it was done.
I don't remember where I read this article. If the story rings a
bell with anyone, let me know.
In his paper "The history of FORTRAN I, II and III??? presented at the
First ACM SIGPLAN conference on History of Programming Languages (1978),
John Backus said:
It was an exciting period; when later on we began
to get fragments
of compiled programs out of the system, we were often astonished at
the surprising transformations in the indexing operations and in the
arrangement of the computation which the compiler made, changes which
made the object program efficient but which we would not have thought
to make as programmers ourselves (even though, of course, Nelson or
Ziller could figure out how the indexing worked, Sheridan could explain
how an expresssion had been optimized beyond recognition, and Goldberg
or Sayre could tell us how section 5 had generated additional indexing
operations). Transfers of control appeared which corresponded to no
source statement, expressions were radically rearranged, and the same
DO statement might produce no instructions in the object program in one
context, and in another it would produce many instructions in different
places in the program.
The paper is available here, courtesy of ACM:
http://www.softwarepreservation.org/projects/FORTRAN/index.html .