Re: RE: RE: Good books in computer science?

2009-06-22 Thread Bob Martin
in 118305 20090621 214008 Phil Runciman ph...@aspexconsulting.co.nz wrote: How many instruction sets have you used? I have used at least 9. IBM 1401 IBM 1410 IBM 7090/7094 IBM 1620 IBM 360 IBM System/7 IBM 1130 IBM 1800 IBM Series/1 Intel 8080 etc Motorola 6800 etc Texas 9900 (my second

RE: RE: Good books in computer science?

2009-06-21 Thread Phil Runciman
-From: Bob Martin [mailto:bob.mar...@excite.com] -.Sent: Thursday, 18 June 2009 6:07 p.m. -Subject: Re: RE: Good books in computer science? -in 117815 20090617 221804 Phil Runciman ph...@aspexconsulting.co.nz wrote: -Because it reminds me of when things went badly wrong. IBM360, Von Neumann

RE: RE: Good books in computer science?

2009-06-21 Thread Lawrence D'Oliveiro
In message mailman.1928.1245616909.8015.python-l...@python.org, Phil Runciman wrote: What I can say is that for scientific/engineering calculations the RPN of KDF9 was Great because assembler was no harder than using algol60 for the calculations part of the problems I worked on.

Re: RE: Good books in computer science?

2009-06-19 Thread Bob Martin
in 117815 20090617 221804 Phil Runciman ph...@aspexconsulting.co.nz wrote: Because it reminds me of when things went badly wrong. IBM360, Von Neumann = architecture, no hardware stacks ... IMHO Burroughs and ICL had better approaches to OS design back then but had= less resources to develop their