Bill Arnold wrote: > 1. The macro assembler is effectively the basis for 'high level' > languages, all of which produce exactly the same thing: machine code. So > whether we're teaching machines using their native language or some > 'higher level' dialect we're really just saying the same thing > differently.
More people are able to say those things, which drives evolution on the quality of the things we say. > 2. it's not the "how we do" part that really matters, it's the "what we > do", and on that count our record is pitiful. I don't follow this. We are using computers everywhere, advancing our understanding of the universe, coming up with new ways to model just about everything, for example. So what do you want us to do with computer technology that someone somewhere isn't already doing? And how we do things certainly matters. You can decide to hike over a hill, dig a tunnel through it, or build a flying machine and soar over it. Paul _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
