Liste des Groupes | Revenir à cu shell |
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.
But that's not important. If we go back and look at what I
>
|No. It translates one computer _language_ to another computer
|_language_. In the usual case, that's from a textual source
>
Note that I said, "computer language", not "programming
language". Being a human-readable language is not a requirement
for a computer language.
Your claim that "machine language" is not a "language" is simply
not true. Your claim that a "proper" compiler must take the
shape you are pushing is also not true.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.