Article View: alt.folklore.computers
Article #623604Re: The birth of BASIC
From: Quadibloc
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2018 17:31
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2018 17:31
32 lines
3077 bytes
3077 bytes
On Monday, June 4, 2018 at 11:28:18 AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote: > On Monday, June 4, 2018 at 11:12:41 AM UTC-6, Alan Bowler wrote: > > On 2018-06-02 7:23 AM, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote: > > > On 02/06/2018 03:44, John Levine wrote: > > >> Dartmouth's compiler was quite impressive, > > >> typically compiling an entire program in one or > > >> two clock ticks. It was so fast that nobody > > >> bothered to save object code. > > Since the 635 and several generations of successors > > were asynchronous machines I'm not clear what is > > meant by "clock tick" > I don't think any compiler, no matter how impresive, could compile a program of > any length in two processor clock cycles. > Compiling one in *two seconds* of wall-clock time, however, is perfectly > possible, and it would have been impressive on a computer made from discrete > transistors. > So I think the problem is that he meant a completely different kind of "clock > tick" from the kind you were thinking of that the GE 635 didn't have. Or it could have even been able to compile a program in 1/30 of a second, not just two seconds - which would be two 1/60 second "ticks" of the computer's real-time clock... at least, many mainframes of that era synchronized their real time clock to the mains frequency. Oops, the AC power frequency. If they called it _that_, it would be 1/50 second. John Savard
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<cf74400f-2703-41ba-acaf-929add8fb2ac@googlegroups.com>Path:
mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!p41-v6ni3076qtp.1!nntp.google.com!x25-v6no3262696qto.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mailReferences:
<874lisvjda.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> <439a1044-9919-4234-ad93-d8741b1bd71c@googlegroups.com> <pescmn$m7o$1@dont-email.me> <cb11f87e-44a9-4f0b-b4b3-998177600274@googlegroups.com> <pet0ag$174f$1@gal.iecc.com> <petuom$iln$1@dont-email.me> <pf3ru7$ct1$1@dont-email.me> <0ccc0e69-2ccc-4566-9d87-985ee301dba9@googlegroups.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Received: by 2002:aed:3e8a:: with SMTP id n10-v6mr3678612qtf.33.1528133518200; Mon, 04 Jun 2018 10:31:58 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: alt.folklore.computers@googlegroups.com Received: by 2002:a0c:9e23:: with SMTP id p35-v6ls1496819qve.11.gmail; Mon, 04 Jun 2018 10:31:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a0c:8a9d:: with SMTP id 29-v6mr12556508qvv.29.1528133517423; Mon, 04 Jun 2018 10:31:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a5b:a8c:: with SMTP id h12-v6mr1003862ybq.10.1528133517322; Mon, 04 Jun 2018 10:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Path: mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!p41-v6ni3076qtp.1!nntp.google.com!x25-v6no3262696qto.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 10:31:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <0ccc0e69-2ccc-4566-9d87-985ee301dba9@googlegroups.com> Complaints-To: groups...@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=72.143.235.80; posting-account=1nOeKQkAAABD2jxp4Pzmx9Hx5g9miO8y NNTP-Posting-Host: 72.143.235.80 References: <874lisvjda.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> <439a1044-9919-4234-ad93-d8741b1bd71c@googlegroups.com> <pescmn$m7o$1@dont-email.me> <cb11f87e-44a9-4f0b-b4b3-998177600274@googlegroups.com> <pet0ag$174f$1@gal.iecc.com> <petuom$iln$1@dont-email.me> <pf3ru7$ct1$1@dont-email.me> <0ccc0e69-2ccc-4566-9d87-985ee301dba9@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <cf74400f-2703-41ba-acaf-929add8fb2ac@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: The birth of BASIC From: Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> Injection-Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2018 17:31:57 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit