Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!news.stack.nl!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed6.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.001 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'binary': 0.05; 'memory.': 0.05; 'things.': 0.05; 'subject:Python': 0.05; 'controlling': 0.07; 'indicated': 0.07; 'purpose.': 0.07; 'wednesday,': 0.07; 'memory': 0.09; 'python': 0.09; 'indeed,': 0.09; 'lawrence': 0.09; 'patches': 0.09; 'systems.': 0.12; 'fix': 0.14; 'dec': 0.14; 'to:name:python-list@python.org': 0.14; '1990': 0.16; 'assembler': 0.16; 'awesome.': 0.16; "didn't,": 0.16; 'function?': 0.16; 'reboot': 0.16; 'reload': 0.16; 'situation.': 0.16; 'specific.': 0.16; 'tape': 0.16; 'trap': 0.16; 'message-----': 0.17; 'wed,': 0.18; 'code,': 0.19; 'wrote:': 0.19; 'expanded': 0.21; 'header:In- Reply-To:1': 0.22; 'select': 0.22; 'implemented': 0.23; "i've": 0.24; 'machine': 0.25; 'function': 0.26; 'followed': 0.27; 'piece': 0.28; 'subject: [': 0.28; 'especially': 0.28; 'source': 0.29; 'worked': 0.29; 'assistance,': 0.30; 'loaded': 0.30; 'initial': 0.30; 'practical': 0.30; 'chris': 0.31; 'generally': 0.31; 'code': 0.32; 'running': 0.33; 'rather': 0.33; 'skip:- 10': 0.34; 'apply': 0.34; 'am,': 0.34; 'e.g.': 0.34; 'to:addr:python- list': 0.35; 'heard': 0.35; 'wanted': 0.36; 'grant': 0.36; 'languages': 0.36; 'starting': 0.36; 'similar': 0.36; 'email addr:python.org': 0.37; 'but': 0.37; 'subject:': 0.37; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'charset:us-ascii': 0.38; 'unable': 0.38; 'from:': 0.38; 'some': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'large': 0.40; 'less': 0.40; 'quite': 0.40; 'reason': 0.40; 'email name:python-list': 0.62; 'received:nz': 0.62; '2012': 0.62; 're:': 0.64; 'computers': 0.66; 'series': 0.68; 'sounds': 0.71; 'paper': 0.76; 'a.m.': 0.84; 'email addr:yahoo.co.uk]': 0.84; 'received:210.54': 0.84; 'received:210.54.141': 0.84; 'received:xtra.co.nz': 0.84; 'edwards': 0.91; 'phil': 0.91; 'steps.': 0.91; 'subject:\t': 0.91; 'received:219': 0.93; 'received:co.nz': 0.93 From: Phil Runciman To: "python-list@python.org" Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 09:50:24 +1200 Subject: RE: Number of languages known [was Re: Python is readable] - somewhat OT Thread-Topic: Number of languages known [was Re: Python is readable] - somewhat OT Thread-Index: Ac0RrqQfEYaoj5gBQvy9ozMShWbzPgAMmnmw References: <4f7512db$0$29981$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <78a6d2f8-23de-496a-afb7-943b60e57c88@mq9g2000pbb.googlegroups.com> <94c6033a-26e7-4b49-911c-b63ca01d13ea@wj4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com> <0f1ead89-f0f1-4179-904d-ec1efda38809@t2g2000pbg.googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, en-NZ Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, en-NZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 55 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1333489838 news.xs4all.nl 6861 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:56473 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:22641 > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Lawrence [mailto:breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk] > Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2012 3:16 a.m. > To: python-list@python.org > Subject: Re: Number of languages known [was Re: Python is readable] - > somewhat OT >=20 > On 03/04/2012 15:56, Chris Angelico wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:46 AM, Grant > Edwards wrote: > >> Anybody remember DEC's VAX/VMS "patch" utility? Apparently, DEC > >> thought it was a practical way to fix things. It had a built-in > >> assembler and let you "insert" new code into a function by > >> auto-allocating a location for the new code an hooking it into the > >> indicated spot with jump instructions. > >> > >> The mind wobbled. > > > > Not specifically, but I _have_ heard of various systems whose source > > code and binary were multiple years divergent. It's actually not a > > difficult trap to fall into, especially once you start patching > > running systems. I've had quite a few computers that have been unable > > to reboot without assistance, because they go for months or years > > without ever having to go through that initial program load. (I've > had > > _programs_ that were unable to load, for the same reason.) But > > auto-allocating a new spot for your expanded function? That's just... > > awesome. My mind is, indeed, wobbling. > > > > ChrisA >=20 > Around 1990 I worked on Telematics kit. The patches on all their > software were implemented via assembler once the original binary had > been loaded into memory. They even came up with a system that let you > select which patches you wanted and which you didn't, as e.g. some > patches were customer specific. >=20 > -- > Cheers. >=20 > Mark Lawrence. >=20 In the 70's I worked with Honeywell 16 Series computers controlling a varie= ty of systems. The patches were loaded as a starting address followed by ma= chine code, using a piece of software for this purpose. This all sounds rat= her similar to Mark's situation. The reason however is less obvious. On the= H16 series we did not have a multi-access O/S and the process of assemblin= g and linking a large system involved many steps. Often the modifications r= equired were trivial. It was generally easier to reload a memory dump from = off paper tape and then apply the patches. Phil Runciman