>George,
>
>>>>>Actually, you can construct a language without an iteration structure using only assignment and decision branching if you permit data indirection...dig out a copy of Knuth, volume 1, where he defines the minimum set of operators for his MIX language if you're particularly interested.
>>>>
>>>>That's a reference I might look into. However, would you consider MIX a high level language? Would you consider data indirection a substitute for iteration structure?
>>>
>>>No, MIX is a very low level language, but then FORTH, a potentially high level language, has no iterator; you build one once and forget about it forever after.
>>>
>>>Indirection is the mechanism that allows you to step through a block of data repetitiously through alteration of an index identifier or pointer; without indirection, you need a mechanism that explicitly alters the pointer rather than permitting you to say "the thing that is N from this point".
>>
>>OIC! Funny you should mention Forth. I played around with Fig-Forth back, um, 1984-1986 or so. Never did care for it much. The Reverse Polish Notation drove me nuts. Assembler seemed so much simpler.< bg >
>
>Shouldn't that line have been, "Nuts, the Polish Notation, Reversed, drove me. Simpler, Assembler was" <g>
>
>Kind of like a prerequisite for "The School of Yoda" or something... <g>

ROFLMAO!