Why is Ada considered "too specialized" for scientific use
in [Fortran]
|
From: J. Clarke on 6 Jun 2010 11:19 On 6/6/2010 12:25 AM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote: > In<4c0a2e36$0$34205$c30e37c6(a)exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 06/05/2010 > at 08:58 PM, Dave Frank<robin51(a)dodo.com.au> said: > >> Of course, the programs were in machine code. > > Your saying "of course" does not make it true, or even plausible. You > keep refusing to actually provide evidence, or even independent > claims. The last time you cited something that you claimed to have > been written in machine language it turned out to have been written in > assembler. What do you believe to be the difference between machine code and assembler?
From: Simon Wright on 6 Jun 2010 12:51 "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet(a)cox.net> writes: > On 6/6/2010 12:25 AM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote: >> In<4c0a2e36$0$34205$c30e37c6(a)exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 06/05/2010 >> at 08:58 PM, Dave Frank<robin51(a)dodo.com.au> said: >> >>> Of course, the programs were in machine code. >> >> Your saying "of course" does not make it true, or even plausible. You >> keep refusing to actually provide evidence, or even independent >> claims. The last time you cited something that you claimed to have >> been written in machine language it turned out to have been written in >> assembler. > > What do you believe to be the difference between machine code and assembler? Perhaps he means they look different :-) Ferranti's Fixed-Point AutoCode: v1 = v2 + v3 Binary: 000 01 0 000 00001 00010 00011 Spoken as: 0110 1 2 3 Clearly not the same at all!!!
From: glen herrmannsfeldt on 6 Jun 2010 13:10 In comp.lang.fortran Arthur Evans Jr <nospam(a)someisp.net> wrote: > In article <4c0b234f$1$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice(a)news.patriot.net>, > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote: >> The last time you cited something that you claimed to have >> been written in machine language it turned out to have been >> written in assembler. > As one who was writing programs in 1957, I can assure you that the two > terms were then used interchangeably. Unless you are actually doing it. There are stories from the early days of S/360 about patching object decks by adding cards. As each card has a starting address and length, you could easily patch a few bytes by punching a new card with the appropriate bytes and adding it later in the object deck. In that case, one might actually try to keep the distinction. Otherwise, I agree. -- glen
From: Martin Krischik on 6 Jun 2010 13:15 Am 06.06.2010, 17:19 Uhr, schrieb J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet(a)cox.net>: > On 6/6/2010 12:25 AM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote: > What do you believe to be the difference between machine code and > assembler? 6502 Assembler: LDA #10 6502 Machine code: A9 10 Any more silly questions? Martin -- Martin Krischik mailto://krischik(a)users.sourceforge.net https://sourceforge.net/users/krischik
From: Martin Krischik on 6 Jun 2010 13:16
Am 06.06.2010, 16:53 Uhr, schrieb Arthur Evans Jr <nospam(a)someisp.net>: > In article <4c0b234f$1$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice(a)news.patriot.net>, > As one who was writing programs in 1957, I can assure you that the two > terms were then used interchangeably. They where not in the '80 any more. Martin -- Martin Krischik mailto://krischik(a)users.sourceforge.net https://sourceforge.net/users/krischik |