Why is Ada considered "too specialized" for scientific use
in [ADA]
|
From: Warren on 26 Apr 2010 11:28 glen herrmannsfeldt expounded in news:hqte3r$et0$5(a)naig.caltech.edu: > In comp.lang.fortran Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour(a)ppllaanneett.nnll> > wrote: (snip) > >> Just take any bad quality resistor, zenerdiode, or a number >> of other electronic components, amplify the noise, and use it >> with a bit of hardware to produce an endless stream of random >> numbers. No computers needed. > > Well, you need at least some digital logic to convert it > into a number. There is a paper by intel on their design for > a random number generator based on such noise sources. > > -- glen Sampling speed is another critical factor. If sampling exceeds the bit flip rate, then it becomes less "random" ;-) Warren
From: robin on 14 May 2010 06:50 "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote in message news:4bc6e4c8$3$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice(a)news.patriot.net... | In <4bc5a414$0$78577$c30e37c6(a)exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 04/14/2010 | at 07:32 PM, "robin" <robin51(a)dodo.com.au> said: | | >I already pointed out that important algorithms were first written in | >machine code in the 1950s | | I know what you claimed; you have neither substantiated it nor shown its | relevance to the points in dispute. Here's another example. Don Shell published his algorithm in machine code. (A High-Speed Sorting Procedure, CACM, July 1959, p. 30-32.)
From: robin on 14 May 2010 06:54 "none" <none(a)none.net> wrote in message news:pan.2010.04.05.20.51.46.20000(a)none.net... | On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 13:19:07 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote: | Dismissing Algol as ephemeral ignores its influence and continuing usage | as a base of pseudo-codes. Important numerical libraries were first | implemented in ALgol, and later translated to Fortran when Algol's | momentum faltered. Here's another example that I came across today: Don Shell published his algorithm in machine code. (A High-Speed Sorting Procedure, CACM, July 1959, p. 30-32.)
From: robin on 14 May 2010 07:53 "Colin Paul Gloster" <Colin_Paul_Gloster(a)ACM.org> wrote in message news:alpine.LNX.2.00.1004132014460.3668(a)Bluewhite64.example.net... | I met someone today who described himself as "an ordinary FORTRAN | programmer" who advocated C for the practical reason that libraries | are designed for C. He claimed that small tasks are good for multicore | and large tasks are good for GPUs. I think you will fnd that libraries are also designed for Fortran.
From: Shmuel Metz on 15 May 2010 21:23
In <4bed3524$0$67490$c30e37c6(a)exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 05/14/2010 at 08:50 PM, "robin" <robin51(a)dodo.com.au> said: >Here's another example. No. >Don Shell published his algorithm in machine code. No. Probably CAGE. Possibly SAP. Either you didn't read the article or you have no idea of what machine code is. -- 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 |