[cctalk] Re: What constitutes a dead computer language

[Paul Koning via cctalk]

> On Jun 18, 2026, at 3:12 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> 
> wrote:
> 
>>> The IBM 1401 COBOL compiler wrote assembler (Autocoder) on a tape. Then
>>> you had to mount the Autocoder assembler tape and assemble it. And it
>>> included the input COBOL code as Autocoder comments.
> 
> On Thu, 18 Jun 2026, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
>> Interesting.  I did Autocoder but never thought of it as assembler.
>> Programming the 1401 in assembler was when you took the output from
>> an Autocder deck and hand optimized it to a single card.  :-)
> 
> Hand otimizing was more likely machine language programming rather than 
> "programming in assembler".

That depends.  For CDC 6600 programmers it was a routine part of every day.  
For PDP-11 programmers, probably not so much.

You can see the difference that skill makes in the 6600 case when you read the 
OS sources, and observe how code is arranged to optimize the use of the 
multiple functional units and the instruction packing.  Some others did this 
less diligently, and it made a difference as I found out at PLATO.

        paul