On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 08:38:59 -0500, McKown, John wrote: > >One of the many reasons that I prefer computer languages. They are not >ambiguous. Well, they shouldn't be. I guess you could design one where the >meaning of a statement is not defined unambiguously. But it is definately >implemented unambiguously. Hum, or is that true? I've heard of cases where the >semantics of a user written program changed due to a change in a compiler or >the use of a different version of the compiler. <sign> > And in common English:
Generic is something that is general, common, or inclusive rather than specific, unique, or selective. (wikipedia) Esoteric knowledge, in the dictionary (non-scholarly) sense, is thus that which is available only to a narrow circle of "enlightened", "initiated", ... (Ibid.) But in MVS jargon: 3420-6 is generic. TAPE is esoteric. Common English: Definition of SYNCHRONOUS. 1. : happening, existing, or arising at precisely the same time. (www.merriam-webster.com) Computer (MVS) jargon: a synchronous exit never happens at precisely the same time as the main thread. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
