Why is Ada considered "too specialized" for scientific use
in [ADA]
|
Prev: Request for parallel computing books in comp.parallel
Next: Press Release - Reliable Software Technologies, Ada-Europe 2010
From: Shmuel Metz on 8 Jun 2010 05:57 In <C832D01F.14629F%yaldnif.w(a)blueyonder.co.uk>, on 06/07/2010 at 04:34 PM, "(see below)" <yaldnif.w(a)blueyonder.co.uk> said: >The problem with Williams Tubes was that they suffered from data >leakage. And DRAM doesn't? The solution in both cases is simple; periodic refresh. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel> Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org
From: Shmuel Metz on 8 Jun 2010 06:23 In <7plPn.6395$z%6.5719(a)edtnps83>, on 06/08/2010 at 06:27 AM, "James J. Weinkam" <jjw(a)cs.sfu.ca> said: >Your point is well taken for machines of the 60's and 70's, >at least for the IBM ones with which I am most familiar. Take anothjer look. >There was a one-to-one correspondence between each of these >mnemonics and their corresponding numerical op codes. How about *these* mnemonics: B, BE, BH, BL, BNE, BNZ, BZ. All expand to the same opcode. Even if you count the condition-code mask as part of the opcode you don't have a 1-1 correspondence. >Nevertheless, it remains true that the assembly language >programmer who knows what he is about has complete control >over the binary code generated, No, the coder who knows what he is about cedes that control to the assembler in the name of maintainability. FOO L R0,BAR(R1) ... BXLE R1,R14,*-666 is far more likely to break when you add code than FOO L R0,BAR(R1) ... BXLE R1,R14,FOO -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel> Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org
From: Shmuel Metz on 9 Jun 2010 06:50 In <4c0e282d$0$56573$c30e37c6(a)exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 06/08/2010 at 09:23 PM, "robin" <robin51(a)dodo.com.au> said: >Drum memories were't successor to anything. That part may be true. >They were intended as a cheap but fast mass-storage device. ROTF,LMAO. They were expensive and small. They were used as the main memories in, e.g., UNIVAC 1103, IBM 650. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel> Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org
From: Shmuel Metz on 9 Jun 2010 06:48 In <4c0e2545$0$56574$c30e37c6(a)exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 06/08/2010 at 09:10 PM, "robin" <robin51(a)dodo.com.au> said: >It has the documented evidence of numerical programs >performed BEFORE FORTRAN and ALGOL. K3wl. Unfortunately, any claims to the contrary exist only in your imagination. It is not relevant *TO THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE*. >I don't lie. Google for Shell sort, David. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel> Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org
From: robin on 9 Jun 2010 09:47
"Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote in message news:4c0f7204$2$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice(a)news.patriot.net... | In <4c0e282d$0$56573$c30e37c6(a)exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 06/08/2010 | at 09:23 PM, "robin" <robin51(a)dodo.com.au> said: | | >Drum memories were't successor to anything. | | That part may be true. | | >They were intended as a cheap but fast mass-storage device. | | ROTF,LMAO. They were expensive and small. They were used as the main | memories in, e.g., UNIVAC 1103, IBM 650. They were a cheap but fast random access mass-storage device, providing the equivalent storage of 256 mercury delay lines at a fraction of the cost and at a fraction of the electronics. The control for the DEUCE drum required but 12 electronic units, whereas the associated electronics for 256 delay lines would have required 256 units, and several rooms to house them, along with 256 receivers and 256 transmitters. |