Why is Ada considered "too specialized" for scientific use
in [Fortran]
|
From: Gib Bogle on 6 Jun 2010 19:01 Martin Krischik wrote: > 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? Yes. What relevance does this have for Fortran?
From: J. Clarke on 6 Jun 2010 20:17 On 6/6/2010 4:39 PM, John B. Matthews wrote: > In article<hugt0702ccl(a)news2.newsguy.com>, > "J. Clarke"<jclarke.usenet(a)cox.net> wrote: > >> On 6/6/2010 1:15 PM, Martin Krischik wrote: >>> 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? >> >> Does LDA #10 assemble to any _other_ code than A9 10? > > Yes, but it depends on the assembler: I have two that generate A9 10, > and the rest produce A9 0A. So pick one and answer about that one instead of waffling. >> Is there any _other_ code that assembles to A9 10? > > Yes, but they (trivially) involve a macro, expression or radix. Not "code" in the sense of "program", "code" in the sense of "mnemonic opcode". >> If the answer to both is "no" then in what significant way are >> they different? >
From: J. Clarke on 6 Jun 2010 20:18 On 6/6/2010 7:01 PM, Gib Bogle wrote: > Martin Krischik wrote: >> 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? > > Yes. What relevance does this have for Fortran? None at all, but it's fun to torment the "I program in machine code because it gives me more control than assembler" crowd.
From: Martin Krischik on 7 Jun 2010 01:31 Am 07.06.2010, 01:01 Uhr, schrieb Gib Bogle <g.bogle(a)auckland.no.spam.ac.nz>: > Martin Krischik wrote: >> 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? > > Yes. What relevance does this have for Fortran? None. I was just answering the question. And loking on the cross post list I am wondering what the question did here in the first place. Martin -- Martin Krischik mailto://krischik(a)users.sourceforge.net https://sourceforge.net/users/krischik
From: Martin Krischik on 7 Jun 2010 01:34
Am 07.06.2010, 02:18 Uhr, schrieb J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet(a)cox.net>: > On 6/6/2010 7:01 PM, Gib Bogle wrote: >> Martin Krischik wrote: >>> 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? >> >> Yes. What relevance does this have for Fortran? > > None at all, but it's fun to torment the "I program in machine code > because it gives me more control than assembler" crowd. Maybe the talk about one of those advanced *macro* assemblers ;-). Now that is a different story. Martin -- Martin Krischik mailto://krischik(a)users.sourceforge.net https://sourceforge.net/users/krischik |