Interpreter Monte Carlo simulations language 

Related languages
Pegasus AUTOCODE => MONTECODE   Extension of
MONTECODE => CAPS   Influence

  • Tocher, K. D., and D. G. Owen. "The automatic programming of simulations" pp50–68 view details
          in Proc. Second Internat. Conf. Oper. Res. , Aix-en-Provence (J. BANBURY and J. MAITLAND Eds), pp. 58-60. English Universities Press 1960 view details
  • Kelly, DH and Buxton, JN "MONTECODE - an interpretive program for Monte Carlo simulations" view details Abstract: MONTECODE is an interpretive program that has been written for the Ferranti Pegasus 1 computer and is in many respects similar to the normal Pegasus Autocode. It was designed in an attempt to speed up the time-consuming and complicated task of preparing Monte Carlo simulation programs.

    MONTECODE has been in regular use now for over two years and has enable Monte Carlo simulations to be written in one-tenth of the time previously taken. This advantage is partially offset by an increase in computer running time but an attractive net gain has usually been experienced in practice.

    A worked example is given in the Appendix.
    External link: Page online at Computer Journal
          in The Computer Journal 5(2) July 1962 view details
  • Firmer, J. A.; and Collcutt, R. H. "Experience of digital simulations in a large O.R. group" in Digital simulation in operational research, pp166-175 view details
          in The Computer Journal 5(2) July 1962 view details
  • Hutchinson, G. K. review of Firmer and Collcutt 1967 view details Abstract: As indicated by the title, this article discusses the development and use of digital simulation (on the Manchester MK1) at British Iron and Steel Research Association from 1955 to the present. Operating experience, simulation dangers and limitations, and requirements of simulation systems are outlined. Also included are interesting tables Owing resource requirements experience as a function of model size and control rules, and a listing of the simulation projects at the subject company. The article centers on M0NTECODE and Pegasus AUTOCODE languages and pays scant attention to the simulation languages more familiar to readers in the US. The article is well written and will be of interest to workers in operations research and digital simulation.
          in ACM Computing Reviews 8(06) November-December 1967 view details
  • Stock, Karl F. "A listing of some programming languages and their users" in RZ-Informationen. Graz: Rechenzentrum Graz 1971 159 view details Abstract: 321 Programmiersprachen mit Angabe der Computer-Hersteller, auf deren Anlagen die entsprechenden Sprachen verwendet werden kennen. Register der 74 Computer-Firmen; Reihenfolge der Programmiersprachen nach der Anzahl der Herstellerfirmen, auf deren Anlagen die Sprache implementiert ist; Reihenfolge der Herstellerfirmen nach der Anzahl der verwendeten Programmiersprachen.

    [321 programming languages with indication of the computer manufacturers, on whose machinery the appropriate languages are used to know.  Register of the 74 computer companies;  Sequence of the programming languages after the number of manufacturing firms, on whose plants the language is implemented;  Sequence of the manufacturing firms after the number of used programming languages.]
          in ACM Computing Reviews 8(06) November-December 1967 view details
  • Sammet, Jean E., "Roster of Programming Languages 1972" 181 view details
          in Computers & Automation 21(6B), 30 Aug 1972 view details
  • Stock, Marylene and Stock, Karl F. "Bibliography of Programming Languages: Books, User Manuals and Articles from PLANKALKUL to PL/I" Verlag Dokumentation, Pullach/Munchen 1973 396 view details Abstract: PREFACE  AND  INTRODUCTION
    The exact number of all the programming languages still in use, and those which are no longer used, is unknown. Zemanek calls the abundance of programming languages and their many dialects a "language Babel". When a new programming language is developed, only its name is known at first and it takes a while before publications about it appear. For some languages, the only relevant literature stays inside the individual companies; some are reported on in papers and magazines; and only a few, such as ALGOL, BASIC, COBOL, FORTRAN, and PL/1, become known to a wider public through various text- and handbooks. The situation surrounding the application of these languages in many computer centers is a similar one.

    There are differing opinions on the concept "programming languages". What is called a programming language by some may be termed a program, a processor, or a generator by others. Since there are no sharp borderlines in the field of programming languages, works were considered here which deal with machine languages, assemblers, autocoders, syntax and compilers, processors and generators, as well as with general higher programming languages.

    The bibliography contains some 2,700 titles of books, magazines and essays for around 300 programming languages. However, as shown by the "Overview of Existing Programming Languages", there are more than 300 such languages. The "Overview" lists a total of 676 programming languages, but this is certainly incomplete. One author ' has already announced the "next 700 programming languages"; it is to be hoped the many users may be spared such a great variety for reasons of compatibility. The graphic representations (illustrations 1 & 2) show the development and proportion of the most widely-used programming languages, as measured by the number of publications listed here and by the number of computer manufacturers and software firms who have implemented the language in question. The illustrations show FORTRAN to be in the lead at the present time. PL/1 is advancing rapidly, although PL/1 compilers are not yet seen very often outside of IBM.

    Some experts believe PL/1 will replace even the widely-used languages such as FORTRAN, COBOL, and ALGOL.4) If this does occur, it will surely take some time - as shown by the chronological diagram (illustration 2) .

    It would be desirable from the user's point of view to reduce this language confusion down to the most advantageous languages. Those languages still maintained should incorporate the special facets and advantages of the otherwise superfluous languages. Obviously such demands are not in the interests of computer production firms, especially when one considers that a FORTRAN program can be executed on nearly all third-generation computers.

    The titles in this bibliography are organized alphabetically according to programming language, and within a language chronologically and again alphabetically within a given year. Preceding the first programming language in the alphabet, literature is listed on several languages, as are general papers on programming languages and on the theory of formal languages (AAA).
    As far as possible, the most of titles are based on autopsy. However, the bibliographical description of sone titles will not satisfy bibliography-documentation demands, since they are based on inaccurate information in various sources. Translation titles whose original titles could not be found through bibliographical research were not included. ' In view of the fact that nany libraries do not have the quoted papers, all magazine essays should have been listed with the volume, the year, issue number and the complete number of pages (e.g. pp. 721-783), so that interlibrary loans could take place with fast reader service. Unfortunately, these data were not always found.

    It is hoped that this bibliography will help the electronic data processing expert, and those who wish to select the appropriate programming language from the many available, to find a way through the language Babel.

    We wish to offer special thanks to Mr. Klaus G. Saur and the staff of Verlag Dokumentation for their publishing work.

    Graz / Austria, May, 1973
          in Computers & Automation 21(6B), 30 Aug 1972 view details
  • Ranyard, J. C. "A History of OR and Computing" The Journal of the Operational Research Society 39(12) Dec 1988 pp1073-1086. view details Extract: GSL and MONTECODE
    BISRA were the pioneers of digital computing in the steel industry, taking delivery of a Ferranti Pegasus in 1956. Since many problems in the steel industry were amenable to examination by simulation, BISRA developed Montecode, based on Pegasus Autocode, for the purpose. Montecode enabled simulation models to be easily developed, though running times could be long. Collcutt described several early applications of Montecode. United Steel received their Pegasus in February 1958 and quickly concluded that the use of machine code and Pegasus Autocode for simulation were too cumbersome. They decided to develop a general simulation language (GSL) for Pegasus. Progress was described by Tocher and Owen in a paper to the second IFORS Conference in 1960. Experience indicated that a substantial saving of time in writing and testing computer simulations was achieved with GSL on a modified Pegasus, with no severe loss of running speed compared to Pegasus Autocode. It was also flexible enough to deal with a wide range of problems.

    The use of GSL and Montecode did not spread much beyond the steel industry as they were machine-dependent, though some of their designers assisted in the development of machine-independent simulation languages such as CSL. By 1960 IBM's dominance of large computers was beginning, and FORTRAN was becoming established as a standard scientific programming language. (ALGOL 60, a powerful and versatile machine-independent language, never really got off the ground except in academic circles, partly because IBM refused to accept it.) The use of FORTRAN for simulation was described by Barnett," also at the second IFORS Conference. He used an IBM 704 with various 'adjuncts', including a cathode-ray screen (to show graphs, contour plots etc.), switches and a flexiwriter to key in data and decisions. Perhaps this was the first use of visual interactive simulation. Barnett made the point, which is sometimes forgotten, that developing a logical understanding of the process is more time-consuming than the coding! In 1965 Collcutt confirmed the trend towards the use of Fortran (and languages based on Fortran such as CSL) for carrying out machine-independent simulations. He commented that for simple problems Montecode proved adequate, but for complex problems an even higher-level modular language was needed.

    One further pioneering development at United Steel was the simulation of information flows and the use of operational gaming so as to improve the real-time control of (stochastic) steel-making plant. Initially management games, involving real managers, were designed so as to validate the simulations, but the potential for improving control and evaluating information quality was soon realized! Amiry and Mellor and Tocher describe a simulation model of a plant which has a model of the information system superimposed upon it, incorporating information lags sampled from distributions. A production game was then played, where the actual management controlled the model of the plant using information displayed on a mimic display board of events and forecasts of events. The speed of information transmission could be successively increased, and the achieved improvements in control evaluated to determine an economic balance, i.e. how much improvement in information quality is worth paying for and how it is best used.
          in Computers & Automation 21(6B), 30 Aug 1972 view details
  • Ward, M. "Language Oriented Programming," Software - Concepts and Tools 15 (1994), 147--161, view details
          in Computers & Automation 21(6B), 30 Aug 1972 view details