Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages

On 14/10/2024 16:53, Scott Lurndal wrote:

Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org writes:

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 13:38:04 -0000 (UTC)
cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) boring babbled:

In article <veiki1$14g6h$1@dont-email.me>,  <Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org> wrote:

On Sun, 13 Oct 2024 20:15:45 -0000 (UTC)
cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) boring babbled:

Oh really?  Is that why they call it "machine language"?  It's
even in the dictionary with "machine code" as a synonymn:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/machine%20language

>
Its not a programming language.

>
That's news to those people who have, and sometimes still do,
write programs in it.

>
Really? So if its a language you'll be able to understand this then:
>
0011101011010101010001110101010010110110001110010100101001010100
0101001010010010100101010111001010100110100111010101010101010101
0001110100011101010001001010110011100010101001110010100101100010

 I certainly understand this, even four decades later
   94A605440C00010200010400000110
 

In my early days of assembly programming on my ZX Spectrum, I would hand-assembly to machine code, and I knew at least a few of the codes by heart.  (01 is "ld bc, #xxxx", 18 is "jr", c9 is "ret", etc.)  So while I rarely wrote machine code directly, it is certainly still a programming language - it's a language you can write programs in.