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: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!news5
From: "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.pl1
Subject: Re: Why is Ada considered  "too specialized" for scientific use
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:12:07 -0400
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $19.95
Message-ID: <hq4ch5026s4@news5.newsguy.com>
References: <hp95j8$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>
 <4bbbc752$2$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net>
 <4bc5a414$0$78577$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 
 p41dcfd4cf54307cc1c98c6878926a2937690db43de298211.newsdawg.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US;
 rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1 Hamster-Pg/1.13
In-Reply-To: <4bc5a414$0$78577$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:10953 comp.lang.fortran:24717
 comp.lang.pl1:1252
Date: 2010-04-14T08:12:07-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 4/14/2010 5:32 AM, robin wrote:
> "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz"<spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid>  wrote in message
> news:4bbbc752$2$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net...
> | Who decides what's important? Do you believe that no important algorithms
> | were written in the late 1950's, the 1960's and the 1970's?
>
> I already pointed out that important algorithms were first written
> in machine code in the 1950s ;  In fact, a whole suite of them --
> all before they were written in Algol.

And the Euclidean Algorithm was written in Greek several thousand years 
before there was such a thing as "machine code".

I think you're conflating algorithms and programs.  An algorithm is a 
procedure for doing something.  A program implements that algorithm on a 
particular set of hardware.  Most development of algorithms is done with 
pencil and paper, not a programming language.