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: robin on 9 Jun 2010 09:58 "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote in message news:4c0e1800$9$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice(a)news.patriot.net... | In <4c0d0278$0$56572$c30e37c6(a)exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 06/08/2010 | at 12:30 AM, "robin" <robin51(a)dodo.com.au> said: | | >That was done by hand for many early machines that relied on mercury | >delay line (or nickel) memories. | | I don't know about the UK, but in the USA pretty much everybody | abandoned the Mercury delay line after the UNIVAC I. John Kennedy said that :- "Delay-lines were still used until the early 1970s as the memory of the "IBM 2260, which was the precursor to the 3270.
From: Shmuel Metz on 9 Jun 2010 10:23 In <4c0f9e06$0$56575$c30e37c6(a)exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 06/09/2010 at 11:58 PM, "robin" <robin51(a)dodo.com.au> said: >John Kennedy said that :- >"Delay-lines were still used until the early 1970s as the memory of >the "IBM 2260, which was the precursor to the 3270. He didn't say that they used Mercury tanks for the delay lines, and neither the PB-250 nor the IBM 2260[1] did. [1] Actually, the memory was on control unit to which the 2260 displays were attached, as I recall. -- 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 19:54 "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote in message news:4c0fa318$1$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice(a)news.patriot.net... | In <4c0f9b82$0$56567$c30e37c6(a)exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 06/09/2010 | at 11:47 PM, "robin" <robin51(a)dodo.com.au> said: | | >They were a cheap but fast random access mass-storage device, | | Not if you compared them to anything used for mass storage. In the early 1950s, what other random-access mass storage was available? | >providing the equivalent storage of 256 mercury delay lines | | Those were not used for mass storage. No-one said they were. That was to provide an idea of their relative capacities.
From: robin on 9 Jun 2010 19:59 "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote in message news:4c0f7162$1$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice(a)news.patriot.net... | 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*. You have no idea what the issue im dispute was, and others have told you so, I have, several times, told you what the issue was. | >I don't lie. | | Google for Shell sort, David. Don't need to. I have read the original paper publication.
From: Shmuel Metz on 10 Jun 2010 06:06
In <4c102ad5$0$56577$c30e37c6(a)exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 06/10/2010 at 09:59 AM, "robin" <robin51(a)dodo.com.au> said: >You have no idea what the issue im dispute was, >and others have told you so, You're lying again. In <4bba8bf1$0$56418$c30e37c6(a)exi-reader.telstra.net> you challenged the statement Important numerical libraries were first | implemented in ALgol, *THAT* is the issue under dispute, and you keep trying to pretend that it is something else. >Don't need to. I have read the original paper publication. Then why did you lie about the language used? -- 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 |