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!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!news2
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: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 15:12:02 -0400
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $19.95
Message-ID: <hugt0702ccl@news2.newsguy.com>
References: <hp95j8$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>
 <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>
 <hugevn02qfb@news5.newsguy.com> <op.vdv17504z25lew@macpro-eth1.krischik.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 
 pccde8c80def7230f77abf9d67d0871e56bf357431464c84c.newsdawg.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; 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: <op.vdv17504z25lew@macpro-eth1.krischik.com>
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11374 comp.lang.fortran:24078
 comp.lang.pl1:1383
Date: 2010-06-06T15:12:02-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 6/6/2010 1:15 PM, Martin Krischik wrote:
> Am 06.06.2010, 17:19 Uhr, schrieb J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet@cox.net>:
>
>> On 6/6/2010 12:25 AM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
>
>> What do you believe to be the difference between machine code and
>> assembler?
>
> 6502 Assembler:
>
> LDA #10
>
> 6502 Machine code:
>
> A9 10
>
> Any more silly questions?

Does LDA #10 assemble to any _other_ code than A9 10?  Is there any 
_other_ code that assembles to A9 10?  If the answer to both is "no" 
then in what significant way are they different?