Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.apple2.programmer > #2305

Re: printf for 65c02

Show key headers only | View raw

<wssimms@gmail.com> wrote:
> Am Samstag, 20. Februar 2016 10:52:06 UTC+9 schrieb Michael Barry:
>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 5:58:02 PM UTC-8, wss...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Also I agree with you on the octal. It's mystifying to me how those
>>> guys (like Ken Thompson, Dennis Ritchie, etc.) put up with using octal
>>> for everything on a 16-bit computer in the 60s and 70s. Of course I
>>> can always justify it by telling myself that they are/were way smarter
>>> than I am.
>> 
>> Octal was a natural fit for all of the 12-bit and 18-bit word machines
>> DEC cranked out in the 60s, but it takes an examination of the pdp-11
>> instruction field format to understand why octal was also "natural" for
>> that 16-bit word machine.
>> 
>> Mike B.
> 
> Granted, it was marginally useful for dealing with three bit fields in
> the instruction word. But in practice that was done approximately
> never. The assembler took care of that nonsense.
> 
> Really, it was mainly familiarity. Once you're comfortable with octal,
> there's no problem, and no obvious need to use anything else.
> 

Exactly. 

The pre-360 IBM binary machines had 36-bit words and two 3-bit instruction
fields, and octal seemed natural for those machines. 

Also, there was no standard for hex digits greater than 9 at first, and
non-numeric digits seemed strange--until they became commonplace. In the
US, that happened with the 32-bit 360 series. 

After you've become familiar with hex, it seems quite natural--just like
your favorite text editor. ;-)
-- 
-michael - NadaNet 3.1 and AppleCrate II:  http://michaeljmahon.com

Back to comp.sys.apple2.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-13 20:29 -0800
  Re: printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-13 20:31 -0800
    Re: printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-13 20:36 -0800
      Re: printf for 65c02 Antoine Vignau <antoine.vignau@laposte.net> - 2016-02-13 23:22 -0800
        Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-15 22:57 -0800
          Re: printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-16 01:54 -0800
            Re: printf for 65c02 "Bill Garber" <willy46pa@comcast.net> - 2016-02-16 21:11 -0500
              Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 16:03 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-18 18:07 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> - 2016-02-19 03:01 -0600
                Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 08:04 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 qkumba <peter.ferrie@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 10:05 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 00:37 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 qkumba <peter.ferrie@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 09:46 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 11:35 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-20 04:40 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 08:14 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> - 2016-02-22 14:13 -0600
                Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 10:52 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 00:53 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-25 09:26 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 12:36 -0800
        Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 07:38 -0800
  Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 15:27 -0800
    Re: printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-16 18:48 -0800
      Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 19:13 -0800
        Re: printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-17 07:49 -0800
        Re: printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-17 07:55 -0800
    Re: printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-16 18:55 -0800
      Re: printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-16 18:58 -0800
      Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 13:14 -0800
        Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 13:27 -0800
          Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 15:09 -0800
            Re: printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-18 17:58 -0800
              Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 17:52 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 wssimms@gmail.com - 2016-02-19 18:09 -0800
                Re: printf for 65c02 Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> - 2016-02-20 00:27 -0600
  Re: printf for 65c02 Michael Pohoreski <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 13:37 -0800

csiph-web