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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,6609c40f81b32989 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,9bdec20bcc7f3687 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Thread: 101deb,e67cdb1dcad3c668 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,gid8d3408f8c3,gidbda4de328f,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!goblin3!goblin.stu.neva.ru!exi-transit.telstra.net!news.telstra.net!exi-spool.telstra.net!exi-reader.telstra.net!not-for-mail From: "robin" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.pl1 References: <4bb9c72c$0$6990$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> <4bba8bf1$0$56418$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net> <4bbb2246$8$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net> Subject: Re: Why is Ada considered "too specialized" for scientific use Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 01:30:10 +1000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3598 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 Message-ID: <4bbb5386$0$56422$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 58.163.128.39 X-Trace: 1270567815 exi-reader.telstra.net 56422 58.163.128.39:1050 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9895 comp.lang.fortran:22191 comp.lang.pl1:1130 Date: 2010-04-07T01:30:10+10:00 List-Id: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" wrote in message news:4bbb2246$8$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net... | In <4bba8bf1$0$56418$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 04/06/2010 | at 11:18 AM, "robin" said: | | >No, they | | Who is "they"? Note the lack of a universal qualifier. Because you cut the sentence and the one before it, you lost the significance. Restoring it, we have: "| Dismissing Algol as ephemeral ignores its influence and continuing usage "| as a base of pseudo-codes. Important numerical libraries were first "| implemented in ALgol, "No, they were first implemented in machine code, "and later rewritten in Algol and FORTRAN." you can see that it is patently obvious that "they" refers to "Important Numerical libraries". | Are you claiming | that all algorithms were developed first in machine code, You will also realize that it's referring to important ones, and that it's disputing the claim that such libraries were first implemented in Algol. | much less all | algorithms developed in the 1960's and 1970's? For that matter, do you | know of *any* algorithm that was first developed in machine code? I'm sure | that there were some, but I'd expect them to be rare as hen's teeth and | mostly limited to the 1950's and very early 1950's. Restoring the immediately following sentence that you also cut out, we see that I said: "The numerical procedures of the General Interpretive Programme "were written in machine code, from 1955." which means that the procedures of "General Interpretive Programme" were written in machine code, from 1955 -- which predates Algol by several years, does it not? As for your supercilious question, do I <> -- Had you actually read my post, you would have seen that I gave reference to a important numerical library. Come to think of any numerical algorithm developed before Algol, you may have heard of J. H. Wilkinson's work on numerical algorithms, for which he wrote machine code from 1947. In his other early work, he wrote programs (machine code) to solve simultaneous equations back in about 1951. as for any algorhtin