Author briefly recenses the R.Bemer's article "A history of ALGOL".

Authors send the report "Formal Definition of PL/1" to submit a summary of it for publication in the Annual Review.

Author approves of the topic of the paper and asks to send the finished paper by July 1. To speed the editorial machinery, addressees can send the paper copies to each of the members of the Editorial Board.

Author gives his opinion on the Bemer's article "History of ALGOL": "I won't make any recommendation on whether or not to publish, but it should be retitled."

Author sends for an addressee's consideration his paper, which might be suitable for the next issue of the Review.

Reply to the letter of 28 March. Author continues discussion of the Bemer's paper "History of ALGOL". They will have to choose between publishing it with the title changed and rejecting it.

Reply to the letter of 24 April. Authors ask to extend deadline untill August 1. A size of the paper is about 50 pages.

Author is enclosing a copy of a paper by G.F.Coulouris.

Author approves of the addressee's topic and suggests to send him one copy of the paper, which he would duplicate and distribute to each of the editors. If the paper was not reviewed and accepted in time, it could be published in the next volume.

Enclosed the author sends an abstract of the paper that he would like to present for a consideration of editors.

The author enjoyed Sanderson's paper but he and the other editors consider this paper more suitable for publication in a journal than in the Annual Review.

The author supports the addressee's and Ershov's rejection of Brown's paper. He also reiterates his support for publication of the other papers.

The author informs of the Editorial Board's decision not to publish the addressee's paper, because so much of it has been previously published.

The addressee is said about a negative decision of the Editorial Board. A copy of the reviewer's comments on the article is enclosed. If he will do further work on it, he can submit the paper for the next issue of the Review.

The author says that the Editorial Board has decided the paper would not be appropriate for publication in the Annual Review. A copy of the reviewer's comments is attached.

The Editorial Board has accepted the paper "Program Optimization" for publication. The comments (enclosed) are mostly minor and will be taking into account in revising the paper for publication.

The authors regret that they are forced to withdraw the proposed contribution on the Formal Definition of PL/1 for publication in the Review.

The author thanks the addressee for his contribution to the Review. He distributes the paper copies to the other members of the Editorial Board. Reviewers' decision on publishability will be reported as soon as possible.

This letter is addressed to all members of Annual Review Board. Chris. Shaw asks to review Petr Partyk's paper and to send any comments to him.

This letter is addressed to all editors of the Annual Review. They are asked to send any comments to Prof. Floyd, the responsible editor for the survey on "Translator Writing Systems" by J.A. Feldman and D. Gries.