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: 8d3408f8c3,9bdec20bcc7f3687
X-Google-Attributes: gid8d3408f8c3,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!not-for-mail
From: "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid>
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 16:39:08 -0400
Organization: The Wasteland
Message-ID: <nospam-9864D1.16390806062010@news.aioe.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> <op.vdv17504z25lew@macpro-eth1.krischik.com>
 <hugt0702ccl@news2.newsguy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: LQJtZWzu+iKlBROuDg+IUg.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11376 comp.lang.fortran:24090
 comp.lang.pl1:1385
Date: 2010-06-06T16:39:08-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <hugt0702ccl@news2.newsguy.com>,
 "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote:

> 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?

Yes, but it depends on the assembler: I have two that generate A9 10,
and the rest produce A9 0A.

> Is there any _other_ code that assembles to A9 10?

Yes, but they (trivially) involve a macro, expression or radix.

> If the answer to both is "no" then in what significant way are
> they different?

-- 
John B. Matthews
trashgod at gmail dot com
<http://sites.google.com/site/drjohnbmatthews>