10 Oct
2011
10 Oct
'11
9:13 p.m.
On 10/10/2011 4:16 PM, Rich Alderson wrote:
From: Ray Arachelian
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 12:35 PM
On 10/10/2011 02:56 PM, Dave McGuire wrote:
Umm, compilers came long before anything
that could reasonably be called
an operating system.
My first computer language was FORTRAN IV, on an IBM 1401. Very small
monitor that was part of the FORTRAN compiler separated jobs from each
other, running the compiled code for one until EOJ, then beginning the
next compile-and-execute.
1620 card deck in, punched program out (or deposit in memory sometimes).
1130 card deck in, punched out program (I never used a 1130, but was
told it would do this standalone)
Univac III had a tape header that was on each tape, and the programs
rewound and reread the "os" from each, more of a set of parameters. Not
a lot in memory. I don't even have any notes on what languages one ran
on the U3 even though I have one.
Everything is going that way. It is a huge, bloated,
bandwidth-wasting, cycle-wasting mess.
I imagine that's what the operating
system users said about using a
compiler instead of coding in assembler. I imagine
that's what the static language guys said about the dynamic
languages.
Yeah, you nailed that one...expect that the verb is "say".
Rich Alderson
Vintage Computing Sr. Server Engineer
Vulcan, Inc.
505 5th Avenue S, Suite 900
Seattle, WA 98104
mailto:RichA at vulcan.com
mailto:RichA at LivingComputerMuseum.org
http://www.LivingComputerMuseum.org/