Re: Disassembler
- From: docdwarf@xxxxxxxxx ()
- Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 15:53:47 +0000 (UTC)
In article <irq80217of9dtubreb3fclfq3789d9r71d@xxxxxxx>,
Howard Brazee <howard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 14:48:50 +0000 (UTC), docdwarf@xxxxxxxxx () wrote:
I worked in a place where an operator dropped a whole tray of punched
jcl cards (and successfully mixed them quicker than a poker dealer
could have done).
Oh, I *cannot* resist...
000100 AND WITH THESE AND OTHER INSTANCES IN MIND WE SHOULD, THEREFORE,
000200 MAKE SURE THAT ALL CODE IS BACKWARDSLY-COMPATIBLE WITH SUCH
000300 LIMITATIONS... JUST BECAUSE I HAVEN'T WORKED WITH A PUNCHED DECK
000400 IN DECADES IS NO REASON NOT TO 'JUST IN CASE' THINGS, RIGHT?
Belts and suspenders. Put sequence numbers in columns 1-6 and in
73-80 just to be safe.
Sorry, positions 73-80 are for MODCODE notation, in the format xxYYMMDD,
where 'xx' are the initials of the programmer... which, of course, makes
for Big Fun when someone copies-n-pastes a chunk of your code into another
part of the program.
You never know when you might spill your
hard drive.
.... and lose all 10Mb of data? That's a frightening thought!
DD
.
- References:
- Disassembler
- From: Alistair
- Re: Disassembler
- From: Alistair
- Re: Disassembler
- From:
- Re: Disassembler
- From: Howard Brazee
- Disassembler
- Prev by Date: Re: Disassembler
- Next by Date: Re: debugging
- Previous by thread: Re: Disassembler
- Next by thread: Re: Disassembler
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
