On 5/10/24 06:44, Paul Koning wrote: > > As for "language to the machine" that's pretty much unheard of. While there > certainly are languages that only were seen on one or a few machines or > architectures -- SYMPL, CYBIL, BLISS, TUTOR -- it isn't because that was the > intent of those languages. I suppose you could pose ESPOL as an example of a > language for a machine, though I suspect it could have been generalized, as C > was, if there had been a desire to do so.
There's a third class that I haven't (yet) mentioned. Design a machine to solve a particular problem or class of problems. Saxpy was such a machine; we have bitcoin ASICs and our latest AI ventures. What was the CM-1 programmed in? --Chuck
