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: 109fba,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: kaz@vision.crest.nt.com (Kaz Kylheku) Subject: Re: Software Engineering and Dreamers Date: 1997/05/27 Message-ID: <5mevjf$i6q@bcrkh13.bnr.ca>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 244287678 References: <5m859v$2qr@mtinsc04.worldnet.att.net> <5mb3ra$1qj@bcrkh13.bnr.ca> <5md5q8$slo@mtinsc04.worldnet.att.net> Organization: Prism Systems Inc. Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-05-27T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <5md5q8$slo@mtinsc04.worldnet.att.net>, Craig Franck wrote: >That you do not feel digital logic is technology is telling. Perhaps it >is more a matter of technique or represents progress of some other sort. Yes, it's telling. The underlying fabrication of the hardware is technology. But the abstract functioning of the circuit is not. Look, you don't even have to comprehend simple Ohm's law to design a logic circuit to spec. On the other hand, there is a fabrication technology in which such circuits are implemented. >(I don't think calculus is "technology" but represented an advancement of >mathematics when it was invented by Newton (or that Leibnitz fellow)). That's true. And that's not to say that we are deriding calculus. Only to a technocrat is it derisive to say that something is not technology. >So, a NAND gate is not technology, but transistors and the ability to >photograph millions of them on to something the size of your thumb is. Right! A nand gate is just an abstract box that performs the service of computing not (X and Y). It can be implemented in a variety of technologies. This is far less true of, say, a transistor, of which there are countless varieties whose precise behavior depends on the underlying method of fabrication and choice of materials. >If that is what you mean, I think I can grasp the distinction. (We just >need to come up with some other word or catchy phrase for the ad people.) Nah, let them stick with technology. Now let me return to debugging some pointer dereference technology. :))