Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions?
by titanomachy on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @01:02AM
(#44506467)
That's a great question. The first language I learned was python, and "for i in range(10)" makes a lot of sense to me. But "for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)" must have come first, and in that case "for" is a less obvious choice.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions?
by Dwedit on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @01:11AM
(#44506505)
BASIC had the FOR-NEXT loop back in 1964.
10 FOR N = 1 TO 10
20 PRINT " ";
30 NEXT N
C language would first release in 1972, that had the three-part `for` with assignment, condition, and increment parts.
Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions?
by kahirsch on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @02:44AM
(#44506971)
This reminds me of a little bit of trivia. In very old versions of BASIC, "FORD=STOP" would be parsed as "FOR D = S TO P".
I found that amusing circa 1975.
Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions?
by zabzonk on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @01:18AM
(#44506544)
In Fortran, it is a do-loop :)
Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions?
by bee_rider on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @01:41AM
(#44506646)
Fortran has grown a lot over time. If somebody said it don’t have a do loop in 196X, I wouldn’t be too surprised.
Really it’s just syntactic sugar, just use a goto.
Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions?
by pklausler on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @02:38AM
(#44506939)
The entire point of Fortran was being an effective optimizing compiler for DO loops.
Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions?
by bregma on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @12:23PM
(#44511900)
FORTRAN IV, at least the version I used on the PDP-11 running RSX, did not have a DO-loop. Just IF and GO TO. But it did have both logical and arithmetic IF.
Re:Phrase origin: Why do we "call" functions?
by pklausler on Wednesday July 09, 2025 @06:49PM
(#44515503)
I don’t believe this.