From: cowan@ccil.org (John Cowan)
Subject: [TUHS] PDP-8 (was: 2.11BSD cross compiler)
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 00:53:55 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTinuzxEGLQj5iiywT6OiYmjCng2hcdkCAkXEC1am@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100930042229.GA66070@dereel.lemis.com>
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1182 bytes --]
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog at lemis.com> wrote:
> Remember the
> autoincrement registers? Even in those days they looked like a
> kludge, but they helped a lot.
I hardly ever used them, but I can't remember exactly why not. I
remember writing quite a few subroutine libraries in PAL/8, and of
course you didn't want to steal them from the main program.
> It's funny how long octal clung on. It should have gone away with 8
> bit bytes.
Octal made some sense on the PDP-11, with its 3-bit register fields,
even though the instructions were 16 bits. I think the notation got
stabilized in the culture just because it was included in C. In my
pre-announcement review of Go (not a work assignment, just something I
went and did when I was at Google) I urged them to remove octal from
integer, character, and string literals, but nope, they are still
there. For one thing, it means that literals interoperate among C,
C++, and Go, though I don't know if that was the motivation.
> But somehow I still have a soft spot for octal, and
> numbers like 7778 still look wrong.
/me chuckles.
> Hmm. Am I expected to understand this?
No.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-30 4:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-28 5:54 [TUHS] 2.11BSD cross compiler Nick Downing
2010-09-29 0:24 ` Tim Newsham
2010-09-29 0:51 ` Larry McVoy
2010-09-29 2:14 ` John Cowan
2010-09-29 2:38 ` Larry McVoy
2010-09-29 2:59 ` John Cowan
2010-09-29 3:44 ` Larry McVoy
2010-09-30 4:22 ` [TUHS] PDP-8 (was: 2.11BSD cross compiler) Greg 'groggy' Lehey
2010-09-30 4:53 ` John Cowan [this message]
2010-09-30 13:50 ` Larry McVoy
2010-10-02 3:46 ` Greg 'groggy' Lehey
2010-10-02 21:03 ` Larry McVoy
2010-10-02 21:39 ` [TUHS] PDP-8 M. Warner Losh
2010-10-02 10:06 ` [TUHS] PDP-8 (was: 2.11BSD cross compiler) Wolfgang Helbig
2010-09-29 3:14 ` [TUHS] 2.11BSD cross compiler M. Warner Losh
2010-09-29 3:17 ` Steve Nickolas
2010-09-29 3:55 ` Larry McVoy
2010-09-29 4:34 ` [TUHS] 6502 and swtch, was " Warren Toomey
2010-09-29 5:13 ` Steve Nickolas
2010-09-30 17:49 ` Tim Newsham
2010-09-29 20:54 ` [TUHS] " Peter Jeremy
2010-09-29 21:34 ` Larry McVoy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=AANLkTinuzxEGLQj5iiywT6OiYmjCng2hcdkCAkXEC1am@mail.gmail.com \
--to=cowan@ccil.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).