Newsgroups: comp.lang.asm370
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!phil
From: phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Phil Howard KA9WGN)
Subject: Re: Bogon interrupts...
Message-ID: <1991May29.013134.14879@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
References: <LDW%USCMVSA.BITNET@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU> <9105271644.AA19339@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Distribution: inet
Date: Wed, 29 May 1991 01:31:34 GMT
Lines: 22

VALDIS@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU (Valdis Kletnieks) writes:

>I see that what goes around, comes around..  sounds like the 360/91 had
>similar pipelining and delayed branch semantics as the current
>generation of RISC chips.  This proves that programmers as a whole are
>getting soft - the 360/91 was considered programmable in assembler, but
>today's programmers think that it's "too hard" and let an optimizing
>compiler do it.....

Yes, I definitely see this as a trend.

Some of us are good programmers and we can do things in just about any
language, and can chose which one is best for whatever needs to be done.
And when that happens to be assembler, we won't flinch, either.

But as a greater and greater portion of the population becomes programmers,
we start to lower the common denominator.
-- 
 /***************************************************************************\
/ Phil Howard -- KA9WGN -- phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu   |  Guns don't aim guns at  \
\ Lietuva laisva -- Brivu Latviju -- Eesti vabaks  |  people; CRIMINALS do!!  /
 \***************************************************************************/
