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: bda4de328f,e67cdb1dcad3c668
X-Google-Attributes: gidbda4de328f,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.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" <robin51@dodo.com.au>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.pl1
References: <hp95j8$i29$1@speranza.aioe.org>
       <4bb9c72c$0$6990$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
       <pan.2010.04.05.20.51.46.20000@none.net>
       <4bba8bf1$0$56418$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
       <4bbb2246$8$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>
       <4bbb5386$0$56422$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
       <m2tyrnjc5f.fsf@pushface.org>
       <4bbdf5c6$1$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>
       <f5a9304e-e6eb-40b2-8944-a6ca4bc92b1b@q15g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
       <4c0a2e36$0$34205$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
       <4c0b234f$1$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>
       <4c0bbadb$0$34203$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
       <4c0cbfba$6$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>
       <4c0e2545$0$56574$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
       <4c0f7162$1$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>
       <4c102ad5$0$56577$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
 <4c10b912$5$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>
Subject: Re: Why is Ada considered "too specialized" for scientific use
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 20:52:29 +1000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5931
Message-ID: <4c10c3fa$0$56577$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 58.163.128.176
X-Trace: 1276167163 exi-reader.telstra.net 56577 58.163.128.176:1049
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11578 comp.lang.fortran:24342
 comp.lang.pl1:1472
Date: 2010-06-10T20:52:29+10:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote in message 
news:4c10b912$5$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net...
| In <4c102ad5$0$56577$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 06/10/2010
|   at 09:59 AM, "robin" <robin51@dodo.com.au> said:
|
| >You have no idea what the issue im dispute was,
| >and others have told you so,
|
| You're lying again. In
| <4bba8bf1$0$56418$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net> you challenged the
| statement
|
|     Important numerical libraries were first
|   | implemented in ALgol,
|
| *THAT* is the issue under dispute, and you keep trying to pretend that
| it is something else.

You really don't have a clue, do you.
That statement is what I claimed was not true.
I presented examples of such that were implemented
before ALGOL came along.

As well as that, I cited examples of numerical algorithms
that were running on machines years before ALGOL came along.

| >Don't need to. I have read the original paper publication.
|
| Then why did you lie about the language used?

I'm not lying.  Don Shell's sort was implemented in
machine language as distinct from high-level-language.

You still don't get it.