From: Christopher Croughton <crough45 AT amc DOT de>
Message-Id: <97Sep24.083420gmt+0100.11649@internet01.amc.de>
Subject: Re: ClosedDos???
To: ark AT mpak DOT convey DOT ru, opendos AT delorie DOT com
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 07:39:40 +0100
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

"-= ArkanoiD =-" <ark AT mpak DOT convey DOT ru> wrote:

> > From: Roger Ivie <IVIE AT cc DOT usu DOT edu>
> 
> > > VAX programs could be manually optimized: remember that Macro-11 _is_ a
> > >valid programming language - and it is hard to imagine someone coding big
> > >projects in Alpha assembler. (back to C vs ASM discussion on this list)
> >
> > That would be Macro-32 if it's for the VAX.
> 
> Ooops,it was a typo..

But almost as valid for MACRO-11 as for MACRO-32 - the macro language itself
could be regarded as at least an autocode (I've seen quite high-level
constructs in MACRO-11/32 code, where the macro language does most of the
work and generates a few lines of real code to generate the result).

(Did I say I have a fondness for PDP-11s?)

> Hmm.. but look at VMS versions: more C - higher hadrware requirements.
> V4 used 2Mb RAM,V6 uses 16!

We used to run VMS v2 and v3 happily on a VAX-11/780 with 1Mb RAM and about
32Mb swap space.  But I've forgotten the drive names now - we upgraded to
four 256Mb drives, massive for the time (1982!)...

Chris C