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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!85.214.198.2.MISMATCH!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
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 17:51:16 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <m2k4qc3y0r.fsf@pushface.org>
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>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 16:51:40 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx01.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="KCXegvZb5vh43D+f3BR6Ew";
	logging-data="30538"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19kI+zkINTIHVuQdgBqg2n3I/+l8D1V/Vg="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (darwin)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:TmdPLDCmK5TOuc0AMibaRK3Fcg8=
	sha1:thlcgb9A51NLkShaCMgg94Azsbs=
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11364 comp.lang.fortran:24070
 comp.lang.pl1:1375
Date: 2010-06-06T17:51:16+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> writes:

> On 6/6/2010 12:25 AM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
>> In<4c0a2e36$0$34205$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 06/05/2010
>>     at 08:58 PM, Dave Frank<robin51@dodo.com.au>  said:
>>
>>> Of course, the programs were in machine code.
>>
>> Your saying "of course" does not make it true, or even plausible. You
>> keep refusing to actually provide evidence, or even independent
>> claims. The last time you cited something that you claimed to have
>> been written in machine language it turned out to have been written in
>> assembler.
>
> What do you believe to be the difference between machine code and assembler?

Perhaps he means they look different :-)

Ferranti's Fixed-Point AutoCode: v1 = v2 + v3
Binary: 000 01 0 000 00001 00010 00011
Spoken as: 0110 1 2 3

Clearly not the same at all!!!