On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 20:43:52 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>
> 5. No memory pricing for any of the 7 dwarves (BUNCH, RCA and General
> Electric),
>Bendix, Data General, DEC, PB, Philco, SDS, Sylvania, TRW or the major
> European manufacturers.
>
The DEC PDP-6 was relentlessly asynchronous
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2019 7:28 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds
I'd note this fun page:
https://secure-web.cisco.com
On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 00:46:00 -0500, Support, DUNNIT SYSTEMS LTD. wrote:
>2 digit years I recall a shop who throughout the 70's implemented 1 digit
>year dates across their files because of the precious cost and availability of
>DASD space. In 1979, someone there took are hard look at what
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds
> foremoms and foredads
Some of us were there at the time. I've lost track of the number of times that
I've criticized something only to be accused, decades later, of only having
"20-20 hindsight&quo
List on behalf of
Clark Morris
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 6:29 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds
[Default] On 14 Aug 2019 10:21:17 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
sme...@gmu.edu (Seymour J Metz) wrote:
>There were other opti
u.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Jesse 1 Robinson
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 6:50 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds
It's a modern day cottage industry--or hobby maybe-
bytes.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Nightwatch RenBand
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2019 11:33 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction
I worked at such company that had 1 digit years. The routine(s) to keep them
straight across the decades I never did fully understand.
OTOH, I also worked at a small Insurance company. The best (non) joke was when
a client called regarding a new build discount she was getting on her house.
My first programming experience was in the mid to late 1960's and even then
there were "old timers" who explained things like this in lurid detail;
perhaps, as King Henry V said " with advantages what feats he did that
day". As I remember they said that the problem was memory. They programmed
on
I interned in a catalog sales company in the marketing department in
1984. Used 1 digit year and purged sales data over 6 years old.
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:46 AM Support, DUNNIT SYSTEMS LTD.
wrote:
>
> 2 digit years I recall a shop who throughout the 70's implemented 1 digit
> year
2 digit years I recall a shop who throughout the 70's implemented 1 digit
year dates across their files because of the precious cost and availability of
DASD space. In 1979, someone there took are hard look at what the future held
in store. So they did a full conversion project and changed
List On Behalf Of
>Clark Morris
>Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 3:29 PM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: (External):Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds
>
>[Default] On 14 Aug 2019 10:21:17 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
>sme...@gmu.edu (Seymour J Metz)
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Clark Morris
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 3:29 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds
[Default] On 14 Aug 2019 10:21:17 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
[Default] On 14 Aug 2019 10:21:17 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
sme...@gmu.edu (Seymour J Metz) wrote:
>There were other options to reduce the storage requirement of a date, e.g.,
>store them in binary.
>
The conversion to and from binary would have been costly in CPU time
and for dates stored
14 matches
Mail list logo
