Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #163878 > unrolled thread
| Started by | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-05-23 16:40 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-05-25 15:07 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 598 — 36 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-23 16:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-24 14:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-05-24 14:22 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-24 16:39 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-25 07:47 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-25 13:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-25 13:30 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-25 16:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 16:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 16:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-26 12:07 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 16:22 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-28 13:17 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:29 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising mausg@mail.com - 2016-05-29 10:03 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 07:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 15:16 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-31 17:44 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-31 19:22 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-01 07:41 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 10:49 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 06:36 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-29 15:30 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 07:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 14:24 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 06:54 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 06:50 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Larry <lelmore76@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 15:29 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 08:45 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-25 17:58 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-25 22:04 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-26 00:31 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-26 10:07 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-29 17:55 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-26 15:57 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-26 20:00 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-27 11:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-27 15:49 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 20:28 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-28 13:18 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-28 17:53 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-29 13:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 16:33 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 18:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-05-31 14:10 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-01 12:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 22:19 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-01 07:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 12:08 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-01 11:10 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-01 10:22 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:51 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 14:22 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:11 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 02:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-01 17:03 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 11:31 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-02 15:09 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:41 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 15:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 10:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:18 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:26 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:16 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:43 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-04 11:08 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:14 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:59 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-05 16:39 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 17:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 10:20 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-06 09:04 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-06 10:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-07 08:59 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-08 15:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-08 15:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-08 10:34 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-08 11:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-09 16:01 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:39 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:00 -0700
Dynamic adaptive resource management (was: PL/I advertising "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2016-06-09 08:45 -0700
Re: Dynamic adaptive resource management (was: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-07 08:36 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:17 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 15:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 23:39 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:05 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 10:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:18 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-07 12:24 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:32 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 22:41 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-08 11:54 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 02:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 07:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:36 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 09:58 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 10:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:21 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 09:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 10:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 10:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:09 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 21:40 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 21:03 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 21:00 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-08 06:08 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-09 09:39 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 22:33 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 20:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 05:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-09 07:33 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 09:39 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 12:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:02 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-07 12:19 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:54 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 09:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 15:10 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 17:58 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 22:31 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 20:37 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 14:09 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 14:32 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:18 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 13:57 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-03 06:59 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 08:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 11:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-01 12:59 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-01 17:43 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-06-01 13:35 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-02 08:13 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-06-02 02:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-24 11:30 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-24 17:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-24 20:21 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-24 18:26 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2016-06-24 21:01 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-25 05:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 07:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 14:32 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:07 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-27 21:17 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-28 08:39 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-28 17:23 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-27 19:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-27 19:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-27 23:16 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-25 07:24 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-25 07:45 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-25 08:02 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:12 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-28 10:35 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-28 14:27 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-28 12:04 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-28 15:21 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-28 21:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-29 12:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-29 08:25 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-29 08:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-29 17:42 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-25 07:31 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-25 07:02 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 12:12 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 16:28 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-26 13:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-27 15:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-06-28 22:40 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 22:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-28 20:25 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-29 10:08 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-06-29 19:27 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 18:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-29 17:52 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 23:04 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-30 18:27 +0000
PDP-10 ZORK [was Re: PL/I advertising] Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:20 -0400
Re: PDP-10 ZORK [was Re: PL/I advertising] sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-06-28 00:22 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-01 13:47 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:46 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-01 17:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-01 16:09 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-02 12:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 15:17 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-02 20:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 13:51 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 22:16 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:43 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-02 20:24 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 13:48 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-02 20:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-03 07:50 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 10:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 11:38 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 11:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-03 21:10 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 11:28 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 12:59 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 05:44 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 05:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 10:16 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 07:37 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-03 17:16 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-04 06:16 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 07:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-04 08:52 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 14:06 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:46 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:03 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-05 17:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:39 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:30 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:27 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2016-06-05 10:04 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:47 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 20:20 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-03 09:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 10:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-04 15:40 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 16:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-04 17:59 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 19:06 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 12:31 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 14:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 13:24 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 18:44 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:07 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 22:22 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-03 17:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:37 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 14:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 21:21 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-03 17:04 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 10:54 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 15:03 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-04 12:08 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-04 16:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-05 10:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:47 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:51 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 13:06 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 16:05 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 15:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:11 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 06:12 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 09:45 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 07:42 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 13:24 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 10:01 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 18:48 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 14:29 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 14:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 19:47 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 07:58 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:30 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 10:13 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 10:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 12:04 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 11:27 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 12:45 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 11:48 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:08 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 13:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 14:57 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:17 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:21 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 14:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 09:51 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Robert Swindells <rjs@fdy2.co.uk> - 2016-06-07 20:59 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-08 07:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Robert Swindells <rjs@fdy2.co.uk> - 2016-06-08 12:00 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 15:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-07 18:08 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-08 12:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-08 09:45 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-08 19:06 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 18:17 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:50 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 09:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-05 12:39 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-05 12:28 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 16:02 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:27 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 21:02 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-05 03:04 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-04 22:42 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 07:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:07 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:28 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:39 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:39 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:51 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 22:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 18:21 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 23:02 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-04 23:57 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 07:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-05 09:25 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:05 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 20:18 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 22:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 05:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-09 07:03 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-05 17:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:32 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 13:04 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:11 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:08 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:13 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 10:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 18:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-05 17:53 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 12:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:45 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:32 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-08 11:53 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 22:06 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 14:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:31 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-07 13:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 15:34 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-08 00:28 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 20:10 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-04 13:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 15:39 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:01 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-03 21:21 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 11:14 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:45 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-03 15:12 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 12:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:05 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:09 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-09 17:27 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-10 06:58 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-10 11:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-16 17:07 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:44 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:50 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-31 16:09 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 16:15 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-01 13:49 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 17:34 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 12:47 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:23 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:19 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:12 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rob Doyle <radioengr@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 02:15 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 18:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-02 15:18 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 20:17 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:54 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 22:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 14:08 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-31 16:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-02 19:19 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:37 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-17 16:52 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-09 17:45 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:56 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-02 19:21 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 09:41 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2016-05-31 13:37 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-31 12:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2016-05-31 16:29 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 07:04 -0400
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-01 13:15 -0700
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-06-01 15:38 -0500
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:44 -0700
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 16:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 16:22 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-26 20:32 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-26 18:50 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 11:01 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-27 13:36 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-27 15:33 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-27 16:07 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-27 19:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-27 19:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-27 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-28 20:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 14:39 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 14:37 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:28 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 10:51 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-27 06:56 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-27 15:51 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 20:25 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-27 05:43 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 05:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 15:26 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 11:50 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:39 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-26 12:23 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 15:56 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:21 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 05:38 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-29 17:53 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 18:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-30 07:20 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-30 14:27 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-30 22:29 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-30 22:22 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:03 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 15:07 -0700
Page 25 of 30 — ← Prev page 1 … 23 24 [25] 26 27 … 30 Next page →
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 18:12 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <f0kg2d-sh3.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #164668 |
In article <PM0005349C1DC5E229@aca407c0.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >Morten Reistad wrote: >> In article <PM00053488A4664EF5@aca41e70.ipt.aol.com>, >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>Morten Reistad wrote: >>>> In article <PM00053473513308E8@aca202a8.ipt.aol.com>, >>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>>>Morten Reistad wrote: >>>>>> In article <5752406a.1552973@nntp2.rawbw.com>, Questor <usenet@only.tnx> >>>>>wrote: >>>>>>>On 2 Jun 2016 12:09:38 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>Peter Flass wrote: >>>>>>>>> By this time everyone was moving to HLLs for system development. I >>>don't >>>>>>>>> know much about BLISS, it seems no better or worse than the others. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The CREFs and GLOBs would be useless. We relied on those listings >>>>>>>>all the time. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>BLISS produces cross-referenced listings that are no less useless than >the >>>>>>>ones produced by MACRO. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So what did you do about compile dates/times? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>File creation dates/times were not in the file; data concerning >>>>>>>>any file were stored in the file's RIB (retrieval information block). >>>>>>>>A customer who is rebuilding a product would always have a date/time >>>>>>>>later than the files we shipped. If it's earlier, the customer >>>>>>>>has a lot more problems to deal with than a recompilation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You missed the point. The compile timestamp is not the file creation >>>date; >>>>>>>it would be in the compiler output -- in the .REL file. >>>>>> >>>>>> You also confirm in heaps and spades what I asserted; DEC never trusted >>>>>> their compilers. They made as good, or better, cref and other crossrefs >>>>>> as macro did. They had lots better possibilities for packaging, and you >>>>>> could generate patches from a "diff" of the object code just as well >>>>>> as you could with macro. >>>>>> >>>>>> This applied for fortran, cobol, not quite for the pascal, and for >>>>>> the algol. Worked with all of them. Even basic. (The basic-plus was >>>>>> a really good basic). >>>>>> >>>>>> But is wasn'd macro. >>>>>> >>>>>> I changed macro for 'fail' the instant I tried it. Lots faster, and >>>>>> had some very useful extra features. >>>>>> >>>>>> But you never trusted the compilers. >>>>> >>>>>We were developing new stuff. Compiler development schedules were >>>>>longer than monitor development schedules which were delayed by >>>>>hardware development schedules. Depending on a compiler ship >>>>>before shipping any new hadware or monitor software was NOT >>>>>feasible. >>>> >>>> Sheesh. Everyone else (that has been remotely successful) know that >>>> you must decouple compilers and OS development. You make a compiler >>>> that compiles X language to Y API. Then you support that API on the >>>> next (and the following) hardware generations. If you make any API >>>> extensions the NEXT compiler generation gets a backend for them. >>>> >>>> This is how Prime got 6 different instruction sets on their 50-series. >>> >>>BLISS was decoupled from VMS. A bug in VMS caused by a bug in BLISS >>>would take 3 years to get fixed IF the fix had to be done in BLISS. >>>To get the current VMS development out the door, the fix went into >>>VMS, not the compiler. >>> >>>In the late 60s and early 70s, DEC could not depend on that kind >>>of scheduling to sell hardware. You keep forgetting that our >>>primary business was hardware manufacturing and not a software >>>development. >> >> Yes, you are showing a massive distrust in compilers, generally. >> >> They MAY have been bad enough to warrant that. >> >> Code does not spontaneously blow up just because it has been through >> a compiler, even a pretty bad one. You may need to fiddle your source >> and your compiles a little to make it spit out what you want. But >> that will be reproducible with the same compiler. > >What "same compiler"? we had a development environment; there was no >"same compiler". If we had used a field image compiler, then a ship >of a monitor version (which was the first code to support the new >hardware) depended on a previous ship of the compiler. We would have >never shipped a monitor nor started manufacturing the hardware. Yes, I mean the same compiler. You must freeze the compiler long before you have a freeze on the OS. You didn't have it all floating, did you? Panta Rei? -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM000534AF1E1DE26E@aca202b4.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164700 |
Morten Reistad wrote: > In article <PM0005349C1DC5E229@aca407c0.ipt.aol.com>, > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>Morten Reistad wrote: >>> In article <PM00053488A4664EF5@aca41e70.ipt.aol.com>, >>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>>Morten Reistad wrote: >>>>> In article <PM00053473513308E8@aca202a8.ipt.aol.com>, >>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>>>>Morten Reistad wrote: >>>>>>> In article <5752406a.1552973@nntp2.rawbw.com>, Questor <usenet@only.tnx> >>>>>>wrote: >>>>>>>>On 2 Jun 2016 12:09:38 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>Peter Flass wrote: >>>>>>>>>> By this time everyone was moving to HLLs for system development. I >>>>don't >>>>>>>>>> know much about BLISS, it seems no better or worse than the others. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>The CREFs and GLOBs would be useless. We relied on those listings >>>>>>>>>all the time. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>BLISS produces cross-referenced listings that are no less useless than >>the >>>>>>>>ones produced by MACRO. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> So what did you do about compile dates/times? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>File creation dates/times were not in the file; data concerning >>>>>>>>>any file were stored in the file's RIB (retrieval information block). >>>>>>>>>A customer who is rebuilding a product would always have a date/time >>>>>>>>>later than the files we shipped. If it's earlier, the customer >>>>>>>>>has a lot more problems to deal with than a recompilation. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>You missed the point. The compile timestamp is not the file creation >>>>date; >>>>>>>>it would be in the compiler output -- in the .REL file. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You also confirm in heaps and spades what I asserted; DEC never trusted >>>>>>> their compilers. They made as good, or better, cref and other crossrefs >>>>>>> as macro did. They had lots better possibilities for packaging, and you >>>>>>> could generate patches from a "diff" of the object code just as well >>>>>>> as you could with macro. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This applied for fortran, cobol, not quite for the pascal, and for >>>>>>> the algol. Worked with all of them. Even basic. (The basic-plus was >>>>>>> a really good basic). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But is wasn'd macro. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I changed macro for 'fail' the instant I tried it. Lots faster, and >>>>>>> had some very useful extra features. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But you never trusted the compilers. >>>>>> >>>>>>We were developing new stuff. Compiler development schedules were >>>>>>longer than monitor development schedules which were delayed by >>>>>>hardware development schedules. Depending on a compiler ship >>>>>>before shipping any new hadware or monitor software was NOT >>>>>>feasible. >>>>> >>>>> Sheesh. Everyone else (that has been remotely successful) know that >>>>> you must decouple compilers and OS development. You make a compiler >>>>> that compiles X language to Y API. Then you support that API on the >>>>> next (and the following) hardware generations. If you make any API >>>>> extensions the NEXT compiler generation gets a backend for them. >>>>> >>>>> This is how Prime got 6 different instruction sets on their 50-series. >>>> >>>>BLISS was decoupled from VMS. A bug in VMS caused by a bug in BLISS >>>>would take 3 years to get fixed IF the fix had to be done in BLISS. >>>>To get the current VMS development out the door, the fix went into >>>>VMS, not the compiler. >>>> >>>>In the late 60s and early 70s, DEC could not depend on that kind >>>>of scheduling to sell hardware. You keep forgetting that our >>>>primary business was hardware manufacturing and not a software >>>>development. >>> >>> Yes, you are showing a massive distrust in compilers, generally. >>> >>> They MAY have been bad enough to warrant that. >>> >>> Code does not spontaneously blow up just because it has been through >>> a compiler, even a pretty bad one. You may need to fiddle your source >>> and your compiles a little to make it spit out what you want. But >>> that will be reproducible with the same compiler. >> >>What "same compiler"? we had a development environment; there was no >>"same compiler". If we had used a field image compiler, then a ship >>of a monitor version (which was the first code to support the new >>hardware) depended on a previous ship of the compiler. We would have >>never shipped a monitor nor started manufacturing the hardware. > > Yes, I mean the same compiler. You must freeze the compiler long before > you have a freeze on the OS. That wasn't possible. A typical compiler development project took 2-4 years. A monitor project to add support for a new piece of gear had to take less than a year. Compiler and monitor develpment projects were always orthongonal. In the beginning, compilers were developed to sell hardware to the government (Navy tests). > > You didn't have it all floating, did you? Panta Rei? Sorry? Don't understand the question. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | usenet@only.tnx (Questor) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5753d4e1.26135691@nntp2.rawbw.com> |
| In reply to | #164465 |
On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 12:47:43 +0200, Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: >In article <5752406a.1552973@nntp2.rawbw.com>, Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote: >>On 2 Jun 2016 12:09:38 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>Peter Flass wrote: >>>> By this time everyone was moving to HLLs for system development. I don't >>>> know much about BLISS, it seems no better or worse than the others. >>> >>>The CREFs and GLOBs would be useless. We relied on those listings >>>all the time. >> >>BLISS produces cross-referenced listings that are no less useless than the >>ones produced by MACRO. >> >>>> So what did you do about compile dates/times? >>> >>>File creation dates/times were not in the file; data concerning >>>any file were stored in the file's RIB (retrieval information block). >>>A customer who is rebuilding a product would always have a date/time >>>later than the files we shipped. If it's earlier, the customer >>>has a lot more problems to deal with than a recompilation. >> >>You missed the point. The compile timestamp is not the file creation date; >>it would be in the compiler output -- in the .REL file. > >You also confirm in heaps and spades what I asserted; DEC never trusted >their compilers. They made as good, or better, cref and other crossrefs >as macro did. They had lots better possibilities for packaging, and you >could generate patches from a "diff" of the object code just as well >as you could with macro. > >This applied for fortran, cobol, not quite for the pascal, and for >the algol. Worked with all of them. Even basic. (The basic-plus was >a really good basic). > >But is wasn'd macro. > >I changed macro for 'fail' the instant I tried it. Lots faster, and >had some very useful extra features. > >But you never trusted the compilers. What you wrote makes no sense to me. There was never a trust issue inside DEC with their compilers, and you have presented no evidence that there ever was such an issue. DEC used their own compilers for development. Where did you get the idea that they didn't trust their own compilers? It seems to be a product of your own imagination.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rob Doyle <radioengr@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 02:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nj0qkd$11g9$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #164545 |
On 6/5/2016 12:29 AM, Questor wrote: > On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 12:47:43 +0200, Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> > wrote: >> In article <5752406a.1552973@nntp2.rawbw.com>, Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote: >>> On 2 Jun 2016 12:09:38 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>> Peter Flass wrote: >>>>> By this time everyone was moving to HLLs for system development. I don't >>>>> know much about BLISS, it seems no better or worse than the others. >>>> >>>> The CREFs and GLOBs would be useless. We relied on those listings >>>> all the time. >>> >>> BLISS produces cross-referenced listings that are no less useless than the >>> ones produced by MACRO. >>> >>>>> So what did you do about compile dates/times? >>>> >>>> File creation dates/times were not in the file; data concerning >>>> any file were stored in the file's RIB (retrieval information block). >>>> A customer who is rebuilding a product would always have a date/time >>>> later than the files we shipped. If it's earlier, the customer >>>> has a lot more problems to deal with than a recompilation. >>> >>> You missed the point. The compile timestamp is not the file creation date; >>> it would be in the compiler output -- in the .REL file. >> >> You also confirm in heaps and spades what I asserted; DEC never trusted >> their compilers. They made as good, or better, cref and other crossrefs >> as macro did. They had lots better possibilities for packaging, and you >> could generate patches from a "diff" of the object code just as well >> as you could with macro. >> >> This applied for fortran, cobol, not quite for the pascal, and for >> the algol. Worked with all of them. Even basic. (The basic-plus was >> a really good basic). >> >> But is wasn'd macro. >> >> I changed macro for 'fail' the instant I tried it. Lots faster, and >> had some very useful extra features. >> >> But you never trusted the compilers. > > What you wrote makes no sense to me. > > There was never a trust issue inside DEC with their compilers, and you have > presented no evidence that there ever was such an issue. DEC used their > own compilers for development. Where did you get the idea that they didn't > trust their own compilers? It seems to be a product of your own imagination. > See page 962 of the following document - especially the section entitled "BLISS-10 implementation and use": http://www.cs.tufts.edu/~nr/cs257/archive/ronald-brender/bliss.pdf "Fortunately, a new optimizing FORTRAN compiler development project (known as FORTRAN-10) was starting at a good time to use BLISS-10. As compiler and language oriented people themselves, the development team was eager to use a high-level language for their work, as well as being perhaps less risk averse than others regarding the strange new language from CMU. The FORTRAN-10 group plunged into using BLISS—and never looked back." "Fortunately, FORTRAN-10 did meet its goals and BLISS-10 was deemed to have contributed to that success." Perhaps some groups inside DEC didn't trust the HLLs. Apparently some did. Trust is funny that way... I can't comment on the accuracy of the claims in that paper. Rob.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM0005348897227156@aca41e70.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164552 |
Rob Doyle wrote: > On 6/5/2016 12:29 AM, Questor wrote: >> On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 12:47:43 +0200, Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> >> wrote: >>> In article <5752406a.1552973@nntp2.rawbw.com>, Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote: >>>> On 2 Jun 2016 12:09:38 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>>> Peter Flass wrote: >>>>>> By this time everyone was moving to HLLs for system development. I don't >>>>>> know much about BLISS, it seems no better or worse than the others. >>>>> >>>>> The CREFs and GLOBs would be useless. We relied on those listings >>>>> all the time. >>>> >>>> BLISS produces cross-referenced listings that are no less useless than the >>>> ones produced by MACRO. >>>> >>>>>> So what did you do about compile dates/times? >>>>> >>>>> File creation dates/times were not in the file; data concerning >>>>> any file were stored in the file's RIB (retrieval information block). >>>>> A customer who is rebuilding a product would always have a date/time >>>>> later than the files we shipped. If it's earlier, the customer >>>>> has a lot more problems to deal with than a recompilation. >>>> >>>> You missed the point. The compile timestamp is not the file creation date; >>>> it would be in the compiler output -- in the .REL file. >>> >>> You also confirm in heaps and spades what I asserted; DEC never trusted >>> their compilers. They made as good, or better, cref and other crossrefs >>> as macro did. They had lots better possibilities for packaging, and you >>> could generate patches from a "diff" of the object code just as well >>> as you could with macro. >>> >>> This applied for fortran, cobol, not quite for the pascal, and for >>> the algol. Worked with all of them. Even basic. (The basic-plus was >>> a really good basic). >>> >>> But is wasn'd macro. >>> >>> I changed macro for 'fail' the instant I tried it. Lots faster, and >>> had some very useful extra features. >>> >>> But you never trusted the compilers. >> >> What you wrote makes no sense to me. >> >> There was never a trust issue inside DEC with their compilers, and you have >> presented no evidence that there ever was such an issue. DEC used their >> own compilers for development. Where did you get the idea that they didn't >> trust their own compilers? It seems to be a product of your own imagination. >> > > See page 962 of the following document - especially the section entitled > "BLISS-10 implementation and use": > > http://www.cs.tufts.edu/~nr/cs257/archive/ronald-brender/bliss.pdf > > "Fortunately, a new optimizing FORTRAN compiler development project > (known as FORTRAN-10) was starting at a good time to use BLISS-10. As > compiler and language oriented people themselves, the development team > was eager to use a high-level language for their work, as well as being > perhaps less risk averse than others regarding the strange new language > from CMU. The FORTRAN-10 group plunged into using BLISS—and never looked > back." > > "Fortunately, FORTRAN-10 did meet its goals and BLISS-10 was deemed to > have contributed to that success." I remember that project. I even won a $1 for finding a FORTRAN bug. Offering a $1 to in-house DEC employees was one technique the FORTRAN group used to shake out the first version of the product before they went to field test. > > Perhaps some groups inside DEC didn't trust the HLLs. Apparently some > did. Trust is funny that way... > > I can't comment on the accuracy of the claims in that paper. It didn't have anything to do with trust. Compilers were done in HLLs but monitor code and the tools used for it was not. The contention here is that DEC should have done all of their development, espeically the monitor developments, in an HLL. An HLL didn't exist didn't exit at the time. Project plans were about getting a piece of hardware out the door. The avaiable tools were used to develop the software needed to ship with the hardware. Developing an HLL which "might" work across all hardware platforms was an overhead which didn't make sense back then; there was no time and no body to do that work. A compiler development from scratch with no ANSI standard would have taken 3-4 years. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | usenet@only.tnx (Questor) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <574dc8fe.9526578@nntp2.rawbw.com> |
| In reply to | #164084 |
On Sat, 28 May 2016 17:53:46 +0200, Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: >I realise that DEC was not very good at compilers. They used some >weird and pretty buggy languages (like Bliss) and were stuck in >assembly (but a very good one). What's so weird about BLISS? As for buggy, if memory serves, the original version from CMU (BLISS-10) had some bugs, but the DEC re-write (BLISS36) was used in-house without significant problems. The CMU version was probably more widely distributed (DECUS?). I don't think BLISS was included with either TOPS-10 or TOPS-20, and most customers didn't purchase it so it wasn't used much outside of DEC. Not sure what being "stuck in assembly" is supposed to mean. Most everything was written in MACRO-10/20 for good reason, and there would have been little point to re-writing all of it in any HLL. > A pl/1 subset on a fast compiler >with some language features included to support the OS task at >hand would have been very beneficial. This may have made a port >to other platforms feasible. What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful results can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years later I don't see where a lot of progress has been made.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-31 18:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <X1l3z.297992$9J6.7803@fx25.iad> |
| In reply to | #164168 |
usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a >cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful results >can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years later I >don't see where a lot of progress has been made. While I never used BLISS-36, I did use BLISS-32(VMS) and BLISS-16(RSX-11M, IIRC) a little bit. There was a great degree of commonality between them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00053437ADA73E3D@aca40da7.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164176 |
Scott Lurndal wrote: > usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: > >>What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a >>cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful results >>can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years later I >>don't see where a lot of progress has been made. > > While I never used BLISS-36, I did use BLISS-32(VMS) and BLISS-16(RSX-11M, IIRC) > a little bit. > > There was a great degree of commonality between them. There should have been a 100% commonality between them. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <798451940.486486565.474743.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #164238 |
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > Scott Lurndal wrote: >> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >> >>> What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a >>> cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful > results >>> can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years later I >>> don't see where a lot of progress has been made. >> >> While I never used BLISS-36, I did use BLISS-32(VMS) and BLISS-16(RSX-11M, > IIRC) >> a little bit. >> >> There was a great degree of commonality between them. > > There should have been a 100% commonality between them. > Well, there are a few little things like word sizes to consider. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM0005344A657DFB4B@aca41013.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164256 |
Peter Flass wrote: > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >> Scott Lurndal wrote: >>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>> >>>> What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a >>>> cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful >> results >>>> can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years later I >>>> don't see where a lot of progress has been made. >>> >>> While I never used BLISS-36, I did use BLISS-32(VMS) and BLISS-16(RSX-11M, >> IIRC) >>> a little bit. >>> >>> There was a great degree of commonality between them. >> >> There should have been a 100% commonality between them. >> > > Well, there are a few little things like word sizes to consider. No. The whole purpose of using an HLL is to not have to worry about word sizes nor how the machine is addressable. A programmer writes an app in BLISS, not BLISS-16 or BLISS-32 or BLISS-36. The installer of the app then uses the appropriate compiler depending on the hardware of the machine where the code is to be installed. If this can't be true, then there's no point in using a complicated HLL, so machine language would be used. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-02 15:18 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uao52d-tff.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #164316 |
In article <PM0005344A657DFB4B@aca41013.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >Peter Flass wrote: >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>> Scott Lurndal wrote: >>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>>> >>>>> What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a >>>>> cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful >>> results >>>>> can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years later >I >>>>> don't see where a lot of progress has been made. >>>> >>>> While I never used BLISS-36, I did use BLISS-32(VMS) and BLISS-16(RSX-11M, >>> IIRC) >>>> a little bit. >>>> >>>> There was a great degree of commonality between them. >>> >>> There should have been a 100% commonality between them. >>> >> >> Well, there are a few little things like word sizes to consider. > >No. The whole purpose of using an HLL is to not have to worry >about word sizes nor how the machine is addressable. A programmer >writes an app in BLISS, not BLISS-16 or BLISS-32 or BLISS-36. >The installer of the app then uses the appropriate compiler depending on >the hardware of the machine where the code is to be installed. >If this can't be true, then there's no point in using a complicated >HLL, so machine language would be used. There is another argument for HLLs; the containment of complexity. A programmer has very stable output per hour in terms of lines of code. It does not matter very much which language it is written in. HLLs are much more expressive per line of code than an assembler. The ratio may be as high as 8:1. For x86 code from C it is about 9:2, to ARM it is about 11:2. When programming in assembler I always have the register allocations etc in my head, when in C etc. I have the structure and the algorithms. We should be able to do a lot better than this, but this requires some languages we haven't invented quite yet. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-02 20:17 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31ba96b723f7e4ca98a209@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #164321 |
In article <uao52d-tff.ln1@sambook.reistad.name>, first@last.name.invalid says... > > In article <PM0005344A657DFB4B@aca41013.ipt.aol.com>, > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > >Peter Flass wrote: > >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > >>> Scott Lurndal wrote: > >>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: > >>>> > >>>>> What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a > >>>>> cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful > >>> results > >>>>> can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years later > >I > >>>>> don't see where a lot of progress has been made. > >>>> > >>>> While I never used BLISS-36, I did use BLISS-32(VMS) and BLISS-16(RSX-11M, > >>> IIRC) > >>>> a little bit. > >>>> > >>>> There was a great degree of commonality between them. > >>> > >>> There should have been a 100% commonality between them. > >>> > >> > >> Well, there are a few little things like word sizes to consider. > > > >No. The whole purpose of using an HLL is to not have to worry > >about word sizes nor how the machine is addressable. A programmer > >writes an app in BLISS, not BLISS-16 or BLISS-32 or BLISS-36. > >The installer of the app then uses the appropriate compiler depending on > >the hardware of the machine where the code is to be installed. > >If this can't be true, then there's no point in using a complicated > >HLL, so machine language would be used. > > There is another argument for HLLs; the containment of complexity. > > A programmer has very stable output per hour in terms of lines of code. > It does not matter very much which language it is written in. > > HLLs are much more expressive per line of code than an assembler. > The ratio may be as high as 8:1. For x86 code from C it is about 9:2, > to ARM it is about 11:2. > > When programming in assembler I always have the register allocations > etc in my head, when in C etc. I have the structure and the algorithms. > > We should be able to do a lot better than this, but this requires some > languages we haven't invented quite yet. > > -- mrr If you've never done it try APL.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-02 16:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <drb6meFaofbU7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #164316 |
On 2016-06-02, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
> Peter Flass wrote:
>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>> Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes:
>>>>
>>>>> What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a
>>>>> cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful
>>> results
>>>>> can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years later
> I
>>>>> don't see where a lot of progress has been made.
>>>>
>>>> While I never used BLISS-36, I did use BLISS-32(VMS) and BLISS-16(RSX-11M,
>>> IIRC)
>>>> a little bit.
>>>>
>>>> There was a great degree of commonality between them.
>>>
>>> There should have been a 100% commonality between them.
>>>
>>
>> Well, there are a few little things like word sizes to consider.
>
> No.
Really?
According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLISS
"All constants are full word for the machine being used, e.g. on a 16-bit
machine such as the PDP-11, a constant is 16 bits; on a VAX computer,
constants are 32 bits, and on a PDP-10, a constant is 36 bits."
--
Today is Pungenday, the 7th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3182
I don't have an attitude problem.
If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <928822320.486592016.496876.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #164332 |
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: > On 2016-06-02, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >> Peter Flass wrote: >>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>> Scott Lurndal wrote: >>>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>>>> >>>>>> What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a >>>>>> cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful >>>> results >>>>>> can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years later >> I >>>>>> don't see where a lot of progress has been made. >>>>> >>>>> While I never used BLISS-36, I did use BLISS-32(VMS) and BLISS-16(RSX-11M, >>>> IIRC) >>>>> a little bit. >>>>> >>>>> There was a great degree of commonality between them. >>>> >>>> There should have been a 100% commonality between them. >>>> >>> >>> Well, there are a few little things like word sizes to consider. >> >> No. > > Really? > > According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLISS > > "All constants are full word for the machine being used, e.g. on a 16-bit > machine such as the PDP-11, a constant is 16 bits; on a VAX computer, > constants are 32 bits, and on a PDP-10, a constant is 36 bits." > You still have to be aware of the underlying architecture - not as much, and not all the time, but you need to know how big a number can be represented in an integer, and sometimes you have to care about big-endian vs. little-endian. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-02 22:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <drbpojFeq3jU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #164351 |
On 2016-06-02, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2016-06-02, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>> Peter Flass wrote:
[19 lines snipped]
>>>> Well, there are a few little things like word sizes to consider.
>>>
>>> No.
>>
>> Really?
>>
>> According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLISS
>>
>> "All constants are full word for the machine being used, e.g. on a 16-bit
>> machine such as the PDP-11, a constant is 16 bits; on a VAX computer,
>> constants are 32 bits, and on a PDP-10, a constant is 36 bits."
>>
>
> You still have to be aware of the underlying architecture - not as much,
> and not all the time, but you need to know how big a number can be
> represented in an integer, and sometimes you have to care about big-endian
> vs. little-endian.
Well, quite.
--
Today is Pungenday, the 7th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3182
I don't have an attitude problem.
If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM0005345F7862843F@aca40481.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164332 |
Huge wrote: > On 2016-06-02, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >> Peter Flass wrote: >>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>> Scott Lurndal wrote: >>>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>>>> >>>>>> What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a >>>>>> cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful >>>> results >>>>>> can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years later >> I >>>>>> don't see where a lot of progress has been made. >>>>> >>>>> While I never used BLISS-36, I did use BLISS-32(VMS) and BLISS-16(RSX-11M, >>>> IIRC) >>>>> a little bit. >>>>> >>>>> There was a great degree of commonality between them. >>>> >>>> There should have been a 100% commonality between them. >>>> >>> >>> Well, there are a few little things like word sizes to consider. >> >> No. > > Really? > > According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLISS > > "All constants are full word for the machine being used, e.g. on a 16-bit > machine such as the PDP-11, a constant is 16 bits; on a VAX computer, > constants are 32 bits, and on a PDP-10, a constant is 36 bits." That's the output of the compiler. Teh code of a BLISS app shouldn't have to know which platform is going to use it. The platform choice is supposed to occur when the app is compiled. So I a program called BLAH.BLI. I want to prepare a tape which will run on PDP-11. So I use BLISS11.EXE to generate the code. Then I want a package which will run on a VAX/VMS system; so I use BLISS32.EXE to generate the code. The contents of the product, BLAH.BLI, should never have knowledge of word size. This is the ideal of using an HLL for cross platform apps. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | usenet@only.tnx (Questor) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-04 02:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <57524079.1567724@nntp2.rawbw.com> |
| In reply to | #164332 |
2 Jun 2016 16:54:38 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: >On 2016-06-02, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >> Peter Flass wrote: >>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>> Scott Lurndal wrote: >>>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>>>>> What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a >>>>>> cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful >>>> results >>>>>> can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years later >>>>>> I don't see where a lot of progress has been made. >>>>> >>>>> While I never used BLISS-36, I did use BLISS-32(VMS) and BLISS-16(RSX-11M, >>>> IIRC) >>>>> a little bit. >>>>> >>>>> There was a great degree of commonality between them. >>>> >>>> There should have been a 100% commonality between them. >>> >>> Well, there are a few little things like word sizes to consider. >> >> No. > >Really? > >According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLISS > >"All constants are full word for the machine being used, e.g. on a 16-bit >machine such as the PDP-11, a constant is 16 bits; on a VAX computer, >constants are 32 bits, and on a PDP-10, a constant is 36 bits." The wikipedia page is correct. Ms. Huizenga has yet again strayed outside her narrow area of expertise.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00053474076792ED@aca202a8.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164456 |
Questor wrote: > 2 Jun 2016 16:54:38 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: >>On 2016-06-02, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>> Peter Flass wrote: >>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>>> Scott Lurndal wrote: >>>>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>>>>>> What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a >>>>>>> cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful >>>>> results >>>>>>> can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years later >>>>>>> I don't see where a lot of progress has been made. >>>>>> >>>>>> While I never used BLISS-36, I did use BLISS-32(VMS) and BLISS-16(RSX-11M, >>>>> IIRC) >>>>>> a little bit. >>>>>> >>>>>> There was a great degree of commonality between them. >>>>> >>>>> There should have been a 100% commonality between them. >>>> >>>> Well, there are a few little things like word sizes to consider. >>> >>> No. >> >>Really? >> >>According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLISS >> >>"All constants are full word for the machine being used, e.g. on a 16-bit >>machine such as the PDP-11, a constant is 16 bits; on a VAX computer, >>constants are 32 bits, and on a PDP-10, a constant is 36 bits." > > The wikipedia page is correct. Ms. Huizenga has yet again strayed outside her > narrow area of expertise. Once again, you have reinterpreted what I wrote. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-04 14:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <drg5mcFama6U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #164481 |
On 2016-06-04, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
> Questor wrote:
>> 2 Jun 2016 16:54:38 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>On 2016-06-02, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> Peter Flass wrote:
>>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>>>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes:
>>>>>>>> What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a
>>>>>>>> cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful
>>>>>> results
>>>>>>>> can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years
> later
>>>>>>>> I don't see where a lot of progress has been made.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While I never used BLISS-36, I did use BLISS-32(VMS) and
> BLISS-16(RSX-11M,
>>>>>> IIRC)
>>>>>>> a little bit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There was a great degree of commonality between them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There should have been a 100% commonality between them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, there are a few little things like word sizes to consider.
>>>>
>>>> No.
>>>
>>>Really?
>>>
>>>According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLISS
>>>
>>>"All constants are full word for the machine being used, e.g. on a 16-bit
>>>machine such as the PDP-11, a constant is 16 bits; on a VAX computer,
>>>constants are 32 bits, and on a PDP-10, a constant is 36 bits."
>>
>> The wikipedia page is correct. Ms. Huizenga has yet again strayed outside
> her
>> narrow area of expertise.
>
> Once again, you have reinterpreted what I wrote.
If so, he did it the same way I did.
--
Today is Setting Orange, the 9th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3182
I don't have an attitude problem.
If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00053488C281505C@aca41e70.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164487 |
Huge wrote: > On 2016-06-04, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >> Questor wrote: >>> 2 Jun 2016 16:54:38 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: >>>>On 2016-06-02, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>>> Peter Flass wrote: >>>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Scott Lurndal wrote: >>>>>>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>>>>>>>> What most people are missing here is that BLISS was supposed to be a >>>>>>>>> cross-platform language. The number of times that produced successful >>>>>>> results >>>>>>>>> can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but forty years >> later >>>>>>>>> I don't see where a lot of progress has been made. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> While I never used BLISS-36, I did use BLISS-32(VMS) and >> BLISS-16(RSX-11M, >>>>>>> IIRC) >>>>>>>> a little bit. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There was a great degree of commonality between them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There should have been a 100% commonality between them. >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, there are a few little things like word sizes to consider. >>>>> >>>>> No. >>>> >>>>Really? >>>> >>>>According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLISS >>>> >>>>"All constants are full word for the machine being used, e.g. on a 16-bit >>>>machine such as the PDP-11, a constant is 16 bits; on a VAX computer, >>>>constants are 32 bits, and on a PDP-10, a constant is 36 bits." >>> >>> The wikipedia page is correct. Ms. Huizenga has yet again strayed outside >> her >>> narrow area of expertise. >> >> Once again, you have reinterpreted what I wrote. > > If so, he did it the same way I did. Example. NML. The NML running on the -10 side and the NML running on the -11 side didn't have to be written twice. AT least that's the ideal situation when an HLL is used. It is the compiler used to build it which determines the word size used in the executable. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 25 of 30 — ← Prev page 1 … 23 24 [25] 26 27 … 30 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web