From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: John Walker Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1997/01/06 Message-ID: <199701061739.RAA29309@sw-eng.falls-church.va.us>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 208138768 sender: Ada programming language comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-01-06T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On Wed, 1 Jan 1997 02:35:34 GMT, Ell writes: >In this thread someone said assembler was "real" and higher level >languages were abstractions above that. I always thought voltage >states/levels were real and that assembler was an abstraction of voltage >states/levels. > >Elliott Well, almost... :) Those who want to be "real" can avail themselves of the simple, easy, intuitively obvious, always understandable option of machine language (for PCs, for instance, direct hex). The distinction is that hex is a *representation* of the voltage levels, but not an "abstraction"; assembler is indeed an *abstraction*. To wit, the sig: --------------------------------------------------- John Walker, walkerj@sw-eng.falls-church.va.us ---Assembler is a high-level language.--- .GET DSCLAIMR.STD ; Even though this *is* on *my* nickel! ---------------------------------------------------