At 8/23/2011 12:49 PM, john gilmore wrote:
It is a reference, i.e., not a tutorial, publication; and it should remain so.
Just because a manual "is a reference, i.e., not a tutorial" does not mean that it has to be impenetrable. There is a lot that can be done to improve the PoOP and have it remain "a reference".
More generally, it seems to me that a number of issues are here being confounded. I doubt that there is much need or a market for inexpert assembly-language programmers. Certainly there are other and better ways to demystify computers than to teach young people impatient with any idea too complex to TEXT to a friend in 250 characters or less how to write mainframe assembly-language programs.
Wow! What is this about, John? Talk about conflating issues... And there is so much elitism and generational prejudice mixed up in here, it's hard to know where to begin. Just one little point... even "expert" Assembler programmers (such as you and I) once upon a time were "inexpert". (Remember those days, John?) However, that has nothing to do with my desire to see the PoOP improved. I would like to see it improved for my own usage, not just that of others. Yes I am quite able to read and understand the PoOP (obviously); However, the arduousness of penetrating the language does detract from the pleasure somewhat. Dave Cole REPLY TO: [email protected] ColeSoft Marketing WEB PAGE: http://www.colesoft.com 736 Fox Hollow Road VOICE: 540-456-8536 Afton, VA 22920 FAX: 540-456-6658
