Hi Steve - Borland, 1990, USA, and as far as I can tell, the copyright was not renewed after the product was abandoned. Copyright law in 1990 was still somewhat sane...
I am not a copyright lawyer though, so caveat emptor! Typos courtesy of my iPhone and my fat fingers! > On Feb 8, 2018, at 16:56, Steve Thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > > I must challenge your statement about the copyright's expiration, or did the > author put it in the public domain? > > In what country was it originally copyrighted? > > Has the author been dead more than 20 years? [and that death date may be > different for the item to pass into the public domain as in the USofA the > Mickey Mouse law keeps getting the date shoved further and further into the > future.] > > Regards, > Steve Thompson > > On 02/08/2018 05:24 PM, Paul Raulerson wrote: >>> On Feb 8, 2018, at 4:22 PM, Paul Raulerson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> How about the? Object Oriented ASSEMBLER LANGUAGE - from 1990. (grin) Not >>> HLASM, but a fun read for language historians, amateur or otherwise! >>> >>> >>> The manual is out of copyright, and the entire book is available over at >>> Bitsavers, if anyone would like to read it. I reproduced a few pages here >>> to whet your appetites. :) >>> >>> Chapter 4 is the most interesting part to me, and provides an interesting >>> take on the subject I think. Caveat, I never used the OO parts of this >>> assembler, mostly because it just looked like “too much trouble.” I wish >>> I had taken more time to study it back then. In any event… enjoy! >>> >>> >>> http://bitsavers.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/pdf/borland/turbo_assembler/Turbo_Assembler_Version_5_Users_Guide.pdf >>> >>> <http://bitsavers.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/pdf/borland/turbo_assembler/Turbo_Assembler_Version_5_Users_Guide.pdf> >>> >>> >>> >>> -Paul >>> >>> <page52image3841408.png> >>> >>> <page53image3840736.png> >>> >>> <page54image3827296.png> >>> >>> <page55image3807136.png> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Feb 8, 2018, at 1:36 PM, Seymour J Metz <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I can get down and dirty with machine code, but my standard coding >>>> practice is to use lots of macros to automate repetitive tasks, sometimes >>>> with different code paths depending on the target processor. >>>> >>>> As to library overhead, I've certainly written code design to fir well in >>>> a PL/I environment and never found the overhead to be unreasonable. And, >>>> yes, there is other code where I sweat every cycle, but that's the >>>> exception. >>>> >>>> I can't see using the full OO paradigm in HLASM, but I've certainly seen >>>> implementation of parts of it in assembler code. >>>> >>>> That "definition" isn't a definition, it's simply a list of purport6ed >>>> benefits. There are theological arguments about the one true definition, >>>> but there is a broad consensus that it includes classes, methods, objects, >>>> messages and inheritance. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >>>> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 <http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3> >>>> >>>
