From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 19 14:21:44 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B1E0A9 for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 14:21:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qa0-x232.google.com (mail-qa0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::232]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20B812097 for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 14:21:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f50.google.com with SMTP id dc16so649112qab.23 for ; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 06:21:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=KCQYBaEGwmZLZuT8NJonk8KTupT6JhHKFOpuB0d3bLk=; b=ROMbuJOpk5GOCH09ja4m+eZLJHvcHKDs3asn3BvjO/bh0E4AECYs9FpjT4Ole7pgpx 3RfqUic2b0gGhdGa2/1XEm9Taiz18Yn2eMYBO/Hlk0IExW29mNVghGHrzIl0u/zZFtQ6 FQ0W32IfocsRBPhIAlKOLjDvUAjdr6h3UZxvJaGCGrCIMwXAPMMwDYW17xblC1bKI4Mx eaHzO3bx948Bg9nUZTm+SqZMngHwdNgAd245od5FUKrbEWBDXUr78mgHlMUqn7IwiVXX dw+Yr+zXQmI/dWZ9lJpAY1ZD9pZMYX6QDRZmTYs0GgjLByvE75F9A4cnY0lx8vLhkvkQ S8hw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.101.145 with SMTP id u17mr13269810qge.84.1418998903087; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 06:21:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.140.27.145 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Dec 2014 06:21:43 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 12:21:43 -0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [OFF-TOPIC] A real programmer would not stoop to wasting machine capacity to do the assembly as said Richard Hamming? From: =?UTF-8?Q?fran=C3=A7ai_s?= To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18-1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 14:21:44 -0000 Is true that a real programmer would not stoop to wasting machine capacity to do the assembly? 2014-12-19 11:52 GMT-02:00 fran=C3=A7ai s : > > [quote=3D"http://worrydream.com/dbx/"] > Reactions to SOAP and Fortran > Richard Hamming -- The Art of Doing Science and Engineering, p25 (pdf boo= k) > > In the beginning we programmed in absolute binary... Finally, a Symbolic > Assembly Program was devised -- after more years than you are apt to > believe during which most programmers continued their heroic absolute > binary programming. At the time [the assembler] first appeared I would > guess about 1% of the older programmers were interested in it -- using > [assembly] was "sissy stuff", and a real programmer would not stoop to > wasting machine capacity to do the assembly. > > Yes! Programmers wanted no part of it, though when pressed they had to > admit their old methods used more machine time in locating and fixing up > errors than the [assembler] ever used. One of the main complaints was whe= n > using a symbolic system you do not know where anything was in storage -- > though in the early days we supplied a mapping of symbolic to actual > storage, and believe it or not they later lovingly pored over such sheets > rather than realize they did not need to know that information if they > stuck to operating within the system -- no! When correcting errors they > preferred to do it in absolute binary. > > FORTRAN was proposed by Backus and friends, and again was opposed by > almost all programmers. First, it was said it could not be done. Second, = if > it could be done, it would be too wasteful of machine time and capacity. > Third, even if it did work, no respectable programmer would use it -- it > was only for sissies! > > > John von Neumann's reaction to assembly language and Fortran > John A.N. Lee, Virginia Polytechnical Institute > > John von Neumann, when he first heard about FORTRAN in 1954, was > unimpressed and asked "why would you want more than machine language?" On= e > of von Neumann's students at Princeton recalled that graduate students we= re > being used to hand assemble programs into binary for their early machine. > This student took time out to build an assembler, but when von Neumann > found out about it he was very angry, saying that it was a waste of a > valuable scientific computing instrument to use it to do clerical > work.[/quote] > > If is true that a real programmer would not stoop to wasting machine > capacity to do the assembly, is an unfortunate fact the real programmers = do > use to wasting machine capacity to do the assembly, compilers... > >