I worked with STL some but am much more familiar with structured text as
used by Rockwell/Allen-Bradley. However, my first exposure to PLCs after
getting out of the Navy back in 1991 was the Mitsubishi A series with a GPP
for a programmer. I found that one interesting because you could program in
l
On 04/11/2017 07:03 PM, Charles Dickman via cctalk wrote:
> The Balkanized nature of programming is interesting.
>
> I make a comment about C and get a flurry of responses, but ask a
> question about a programming language that is also very common for
> machine control and get no response at all
> From: John Wilson
> It would have been nice if it had stolen FORTRAN-77's idea of declaring
> a variable in the size that you want (I'm talking about INTEGER*2 vs.
> INTEGER*4 etc.), instead of just "knowing" what the difference is
> between int and long
Back in the late 70'
The Balkanized nature of programming is interesting.
I make a comment about C and get a flurry of responses, but ask a
question about a programming language that is also very common for
machine control and get no response at all. Not even a recognition of
its existence.
Siemens STL ist a programm
On 04/11/2017 06:24 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. via cctalk wrote:
>
> I was not aware that there had been any out of order implementations
> after the IBM ACS until the second half of the 1990s. Given Cray's
> passion for simplicity, I would not expect any of his designs to use
> o-o-o (specially
Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote on Tue, 11 Apr 2017 18:05:01 -0700
> On 04/11/2017 04:53 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. via cctalk wrote:
>
> > I consider the heart of any modern high performance CPU to be a
> > dataflow architecture (described as an "out of order execution
> > engine") with a hardware to t
Does anyone here even know what Siemens STL is?
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Charles Dickman wrote:
>
On 04/11/2017 04:53 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. via cctalk wrote:
> I consider the heart of any modern high performance CPU to be a
> dataflow architecture (described as an "out of order execution
> engine") with a hardware to translate the macrocode (CISC or RISC) to
> the dataflow graph and tokens o
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 08:38:22PM -0400, Charles Dickman via cctalk wrote:
>Subject: If C is so evil why is it so successful?
Seriously, I think the #1 reason is that K&R was fantasically well-written.
If you barely skim that book, you know C.
It's *almost* a good low(-ish)-level language, but u
On 04/11/2017 04:47 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
> Apparently there was little concern for either Fortran or COBOL, the
> most widely used programming languages at the time.
So FORTRAN/Fortran and COBOL are still with us and the 432 is dust.
There's a lesson there somewhere...
--Chuck
On 2017-04-11 8:38 PM, Charles Dickman via cctalk wrote:
Google "worse is better". Richard P. Gabriel's phrase, I think.
--T
Because "evil" and "successful" are not mutually exclusive.
I would suggest that the premise (“C is so evil”) of your question (“why is {C}
so successful?”) is incorrect.
No C is not evil, yes it is wildly successful.
Now the ++ in C++…. THAT is evil ;)
J
From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Charles
Dickman via cct
> On Apr 11, 2017, at 5:38 PM, Charles Dickman via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>
Because people are too lazy to use Ada.
Zane
I looked up some of the scsi card specs and it is compatible, connected and
working good. I actually picked up two of the same tape drive, so that
should be a good backup in case one should fail. I am doing a complete
system backup now.
--Devin
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Paul Berger wrote:
On Tue, 11 Apr 2017, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. via cctalk wrote:
These are all very good points. I agree I was exagerating by saying the
iAPX432 and 8086 couldn't run C.
Or were you implying that nothing worthwhile has ever been written for
80x86 (in ANY language?)? That would be harder to argue w
Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote on Tue, 11 Apr 2017 10:18:00 -0400 (EDT)
> > From: Sean Conner
>
> > I really think it's for *this* reason (the handler() example) that C
> > doesn't allow nested functions.
>
> I wouldn't be sure of that; I would tend to think that nested functions were
Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote on Tue, 11 Apr 2017 09:37:27 -0700
> On 04/10/2017 02:23 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
>
> > When the 432 project (originally 8800) started, there weren't many
> > people predicting that C (and its derivatives) would take over the world.
>
> That's the danger of a too-aggress
On Apr 11, 2017 5:29 AM, "E. Groenenberg via cctalk"
wrote:
> Wasn't that not an add-on to 'xv' (xv-3.10a)?
xvscan was based on xv but was sold including xv, with the xvscan price
including the cost of an xv license.
On Apr 11, 2017 11:29 AM, "Chuck Guzis via cctalk"
wrote:
> This has me wondering about how the 432 people implemented FORTRAN.
Oh, there's a very simple answer to that. They didn't!
Early in the 8800/432 development (which started in 1975), Intel was
developing their own language for it, genera
It was thus said that the Great Jecel Assumpcao Jr. via cctalk once stated:
> Sean Conner wrote two great posts on Mon, 10 Apr 2017 21:43:29 -0400
>
> These are all very good points. I agree I was exagerating by saying the
> iAPX432 and 8086 couldn't run C. After all, the language was born on the
Sean Conner wrote two great posts on Mon, 10 Apr 2017 21:43:29 -0400
These are all very good points. I agree I was exagerating by saying the
iAPX432 and 8086 couldn't run C. After all, the language was born on the
PDP-11 and that was limited to either 64KB or 128KB. So any C programs
for that mach
Devin,
The 7208-222 is a high voltage differential device you will likely need
a tape IOP for that. Earlier you indicated that there was a SCSI like
connector on the back, was that on a PCI card? If so is there a 4 digit
number on the back of the card?
Paul.
On 2017-04-11 6:57 PM, devin
I picked up a IBM 7208 222 8mm drive today. I got a bunch of tapes with
it. Going to wire it up and power up the machine. Do I need to do any
special config or commandsto make the drive available, or will it just show
up as tap02?
I want to perform a complete system backup, is there any way to fi
Eric writes:
The 432 architects went on to design a RISC processor that eliminated most
of the drawbacks of the 432, but still supported object-oriented
addressing, type safety, and memory safety, but using 33-bit word with one
bit being the tag to differentiate Access Descriptors from data. This
On 04/11/2017 10:05 AM, Paul Koning wrote:
>
> Back then it would have seemed a reasonable assumption that high
> level, strongly typed, languages would continue to flourish. If you
> assume Algol or Pascal or Ada, a machine like the 432 (or like the
> Burroughs 5500 and its descendants) makes p
> On Apr 11, 2017, at 12:37 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On 04/10/2017 02:23 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
>
>> When the 432 project (originally 8800) started, there weren't many
>> people predicting that C (and its derivatives) would take over the world.
>
> That's the danger of a too-agg
On 04/10/2017 02:23 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
> When the 432 project (originally 8800) started, there weren't many
> people predicting that C (and its derivatives) would take over the world.
That's the danger of a too-aggressive CISC, isn't it? I suppose that
it's safe to say that if you look under
> On Apr 10, 2017, at 11:18 PM, Lars Brinkhoff via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> Chuck Guzis wrote:
>> That is a bit of a surprise--in my experience it takes very little
>> code to support Forth on any processor--that someone would build a
>> dedicated chip for it is unusual.
>
> There are actually quit
> From: Sean Conner
> I really think it's for *this* reason (the handler() example) that C
> doesn't allow nested functions.
I wouldn't be sure of that; I would tend to think that nested functions were
left out simply because they add complexity, and didn't add enough value to
outweig
Two of them went past Pluto in 2015, inside the LORRI and PEPSSI
instruments on New Horizons, running (of course) flight software in FORTH. At
least one more was aboard MESSENGER at Mercury, in the MASCS instrument.
That is a processor architecture with legs… :-)
See pp. 1
On Tue, April 11, 2017 12:44, David Griffith via cctalk wrote:
>
> Does anyone remember using xvscan? Does anyone know how to get a hold of
> it anymore?
>
> --
> David Griffith
> d...@661.org
>
> A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a ba
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 4:44 AM, David Griffith via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> Does anyone remember using xvscan? Does anyone know how to get a hold of
> it anymore?
>
I bought xvscan many years ago from tummy.com, but at some point realized
that I no longer have it. I inquired sev
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Sean Conner wrote:
> What about C made it difficult for the [Intel iAPX] 432 to run?
>
The iAPX 432 was a capability based architecture; the only kind of pointer
supported by the hardware was an Access Descriptor, which is a pointer to
an object (or a refinemen
Does anyone remember using xvscan? Does anyone know how to get a hold of
it anymore?
--
David Griffith
d...@661.org
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
>From an experience with an older model ( so it may not be significant , I've
>just a 9401-p03 ), the only way to know if it likes another scsi tape unit is
>to try it... one may be liked and another no, depending on the tape firmware.
>Same consideration goes for booting from such tape drive.
38 matches
Mail list logo
