Data processing system

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Bob Nelson, Sep 16, 2006.

  1. Bob Nelson

    Bob Nelson Guest

    Does the current ISO standard for the C Programming language mention the
    term ``computer'' anywhere in the document? The ``Committee Draft'' dated
    January 1999 refers to only to a ``data processing system''.

    To what extent can the ``*abstract* machine'' be just that and nothing more?
     
    Bob Nelson, Sep 16, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Bob Nelson said:

    > Does the current ISO standard for the C Programming language mention the
    > term ``computer'' anywhere in the document?


    Only in the PDF disclaimer.

    --
    Richard Heathfield
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
    http://www.cpax.org.uk
    email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
     
    Richard Heathfield, Sep 16, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Richard Heathfield wrote:

    > Bob Nelson said:
    >
    >> Does the current ISO standard for the C Programming language mention the
    >> term ``computer'' anywhere in the document?

    >
    > Only in the PDF disclaimer.


    I am unable to find this anywhere in my PDF copy of:
    BS ISO/IEC 9899:1999 Incorporating Technical Corrigendum No. 1.

    Tak-Shing
     
    Tak-Shing Chan, Sep 16, 2006
    #3
  4. On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Bob Nelson wrote:

    > Does the current ISO standard for the C Programming language mention the
    > term ``computer'' anywhere in the document?


    No.

    > The ``Committee Draft'' dated
    > January 1999 refers to only to a ``data processing system''.


    Clause 3 of ISO/IEC 9899:1999 states that ``terms not defined
    in this International Standard are to be interpreted according to
    ISO/IEC 2382-1''.

    In this context, a ``data processing system'' refers to
    ``one or more computers, peripheral equipment, and software that
    perform data processing'' (ISO 2382-1:1993, 01.01.20).

    > To what extent can the ``*abstract* machine'' be just that and nothing more?


    No, the behavior of an ``abstract machine'' is not the same
    as the behavior of the underlying ``data processing system'',
    because ``issues of optimization are irrelevant'' (ISO/IEC
    9899:1999, 5.1.2.3 paragraph 1).

    Tak-Shing
     
    Tak-Shing Chan, Sep 16, 2006
    #4
  5. On Sat, 16 Sep 2006 11:16:29 +0100, in comp.lang.c , Tak-Shing Chan
    <> wrote:

    >On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Richard Heathfield wrote:
    >
    >> Bob Nelson said:
    >>
    >>> Does the current ISO standard for the C Programming language mention the
    >>> term ``computer'' anywhere in the document?

    >>
    >> Only in the PDF disclaimer.

    >
    > I am unable to find this anywhere in my PDF copy of:
    >BS ISO/IEC 9899:1999 Incorporating Technical Corrigendum No. 1.


    This is probably because you're looking at it from the Contents page
    onwards, or else the BS version of the pdf is differently prefixed to
    the ISO/IEC version..

    -------------
    Page 2 of 554:

    ISO/IEC 9899:1999(E)
    PDF disclaimer
    This PDF file may contain embedded typefaces. In accordance with
    Adobe's licensing policy, this file may be printed or viewed but shall
    not be edited unless the typefaces which are embedded are licensed to
    and installed on the computer performing the editing. In downloading
    this file, parties accept therein the responsibility of not infringing
    Adobe's licensing policy. The ISO Central Secretariat accepts no
    liability in this
    area.
    -------------
    etc
    --
    Mark McIntyre

    "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
    Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
    by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
    --Brian Kernighan
     
    Mark McIntyre, Sep 16, 2006
    #5
  6. Bob Nelson

    Malcolm Guest

    "Bob Nelson" <> wrote in message
    > Does the current ISO standard for the C Programming language mention the
    > term ``computer'' anywhere in the document? The ``Committee Draft'' dated
    > January 1999 refers to only to a ``data processing system''.
    >
    > To what extent can the ``*abstract* machine'' be just that and nothing
    > more?
    >

    I can't afford expensive electronics.
    I've outsourced and now I have a room full of chinamen, all madly moving
    symbols about on shelves. Our English lettters are as meaningful to them as
    Chinese characters are to us, but they've got simple instructions like "move
    from shelf 1 to shelf 2". Finally the room is built over a stream, and
    little paper baots with letters are floated out of the stream. Another
    Chinaman transcribes them and sends the results to me by surface mail.

    It's a perfectly good system. They're currently working on a 300 city
    travelling slaesman problem.

    --
    www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm
    freeware games to download.
     
    Malcolm, Sep 16, 2006
    #6
  7. Malcolm said:

    >
    > "Bob Nelson" <> wrote in message
    >> Does the current ISO standard for the C Programming language mention the
    >> term ``computer'' anywhere in the document? The ``Committee Draft'' dated
    >> January 1999 refers to only to a ``data processing system''.
    >>
    >> To what extent can the ``*abstract* machine'' be just that and nothing
    >> more?
    >>

    > I can't afford expensive electronics.
    > I've outsourced and now I have a room full of chinamen, all madly moving
    > symbols about on shelves. Our English lettters are as meaningful to them
    > as Chinese characters are to us, but they've got simple instructions like
    > "move from shelf 1 to shelf 2".


    Are you renting the room from John Searle?


    > Finally the room is built over a stream,
    > and little paper baots with letters are floated out of the stream. Another
    > Chinaman transcribes them and sends the results to me by surface mail.
    >
    > It's a perfectly good system. They're currently working on a 300 city
    > travelling slaesman problem.


    I think some of the baots are coming downstream in the worgn order.

    --
    Richard Heathfield
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
    http://www.cpax.org.uk
    email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
     
    Richard Heathfield, Sep 16, 2006
    #7
  8. Bob Nelson

    Default User Guest

    Malcolm wrote:

    >
    > "Bob Nelson" <> wrote in message
    > > Does the current ISO standard for the C Programming language
    > > mention the term ``computer'' anywhere in the document? The
    > > ``Committee Draft'' dated January 1999 refers to only to a ``data
    > > processing system''.
    > >
    > > To what extent can the ``*abstract* machine'' be just that and
    > > nothing more?
    > >

    > I can't afford expensive electronics.
    > I've outsourced and now I have a room full of chinamen, all madly
    > moving symbols about on shelves. Our English lettters are as
    > meaningful to them as Chinese characters are to us, but they've got
    > simple instructions like "move from shelf 1 to shelf 2". Finally the
    > room is built over a stream, and little paper baots with letters are
    > floated out of the stream. Another Chinaman transcribes them and
    > sends the results to me by surface mail.
    >
    > It's a perfectly good system. They're currently working on a 300 city
    > travelling slaesman problem.


    Yeah, but they probably eat a lot and produce a lot of heat. You should
    have developed a system based on ants.




    Brian
     
    Default User, Sep 16, 2006
    #8
  9. In article <>, Richard Heathfield <> writes:
    > Malcolm said:
    >
    > > Finally the room is built over a stream,
    > > and little paper baots with letters are floated out of the stream. Another
    > > Chinaman transcribes them and sends the results to me by surface mail.

    >
    > I think some of the baots are coming downstream in the worgn order.


    You know what they say: Junk in, junk out.

    --
    Michael Wojcik
     
    Michael Wojcik, Sep 18, 2006
    #9
  10. Bob Nelson

    jmcgill Guest

    Malcolm wrote:
    > Another
    > Chinaman transcribes them and sends the results to me by surface mail.



    The chinaman is not the issue here, Dude. I'm talking about drawing a
    line in the sand, Dude. Across this line, you DO NOT... Also, Dude,
    chinaman is not the preferred nomenclature. Asian-American, please.
    I believe the preferred term is "Asian-American."
    - Walter Sobchak
     
    jmcgill, Sep 18, 2006
    #10
  11. jmcgill said:

    > Malcolm wrote:
    >> Another
    >> Chinaman transcribes them and sends the results to me by surface mail.

    >
    >
    > The chinaman is not the issue here, Dude. I'm talking about drawing a
    > line in the sand, Dude. Across this line, you DO NOT... Also, Dude,
    > chinaman is not the preferred nomenclature. Asian-American, please.
    > I believe the preferred term is "Asian-American."


    You might prefer to call Chinese people Asian-American, but I prefer to call
    them Chinese. Last time I checked, China was not on either of the American
    continents.

    What do you call the French? Euro-Americans?

    --
    Richard Heathfield
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
    http://www.cpax.org.uk
    email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
     
    Richard Heathfield, Sep 18, 2006
    #11
  12. Bob Nelson

    Jalapeno Guest

    Richard Heathfield wrote:
    > jmcgill said:
    >
    > > Malcolm wrote:
    > >> Another
    > >> Chinaman transcribes them and sends the results to me by surface mail.

    > >
    > >
    > > The chinaman is not the issue here, Dude. I'm talking about drawing a
    > > line in the sand, Dude. Across this line, you DO NOT... Also, Dude,
    > > chinaman is not the preferred nomenclature. Asian-American, please.
    > > I believe the preferred term is "Asian-American."

    >
    > You might prefer to call Chinese people Asian-American, but I prefer to call
    > them Chinese. Last time I checked, China was not on either of the American
    > continents.
    >
    > What do you call the French? Euro-Americans?
    >


    Call them? Normally we just laugh at them and tell them that they speak
    Quebecquois with an odd accent :eek:)
     
    Jalapeno, Sep 18, 2006
    #12
  13. Bob Nelson

    jmcgill Guest

    Richard Heathfield wrote:

    > You might prefer to call Chinese people Asian-American, but I prefer to call
    > them Chinese. Last time I checked, China was not on either of the American
    > continents.


    Lighten up, it's a reference to the movie "Big Lebowski."
     
    jmcgill, Sep 18, 2006
    #13
  14. jmcgill said:

    > Richard Heathfield wrote:
    >
    >> You might prefer to call Chinese people Asian-American, but I prefer to
    >> call them Chinese. Last time I checked, China was not on either of the
    >> American continents.

    >
    > Lighten up, it's a reference to the movie "Big Lebowski."


    I apologise. Clearly, I am subculturally challenged.

    --
    Richard Heathfield
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
    http://www.cpax.org.uk
    email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
     
    Richard Heathfield, Sep 18, 2006
    #14
  15. In article <>, Richard Heathfield <> writes:
    > jmcgill said:
    > > Richard Heathfield wrote:
    > >
    > >> You might prefer to call Chinese people Asian-American, but I prefer to
    > >> call them Chinese. Last time I checked, China was not on either of the
    > >> American continents.

    > >
    > > Lighten up, it's a reference to the movie "Big Lebowski."

    >
    > I apologise. Clearly, I am subculturally challenged.


    I've seen "Big Lebowski", and I missed the reference, though I
    assumed that jmcgill was posting tongue-in-cheek. And since your
    response was neither incorrect nor especially confrontational, I
    don't see much call for you to "lighten up". When someone posts an
    obscure film reference to a newsgroup with international readership,
    they really ought to be prepared to take some misunderstanding in
    stride.

    (I've long felt that "lighten up" was a particularly feeble riposte
    anyway. It suggests that there will be no argument if one's
    interlocutor is willing to forego critical thought and precision.
    Well, so what? I'd rather grumble with the thoughtful than laugh
    with the lighthearted - there's a better return in the long run.)

    --
    Michael Wojcik

    Some there are, brave, high-souled fellows, who could borrow the world to
    play at ball, and never feel the responsibility, whereas others are uneasy
    and not themselves with a single shilling that does not belong to them.
    -- Arthur Ransome
     
    Michael Wojcik, Sep 20, 2006
    #15
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Hubert Hung-Hsien Chang
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    532
    Michael Foord
    Sep 17, 2004
  2. Ken
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    517
    John Saunders [MVP]
    Jun 23, 2007
  3. Rick
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    585
    Walter Wang [MSFT]
    Sep 10, 2007
  4. Albert
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    10,997
    Albert
    Jul 10, 2008
  5. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    754
Loading...

Share This Page