Content deleted Content added
Guy Harris (talk | contribs) |
Guy Harris (talk | contribs) →Apples and oranges: I looked at [http://zseries.marist.edu/enterprisesystemseducation/assemblerlanguageresources/Assembler.V2.alntext%20V2.00.pdf], as suggested, and didn't see anything that endorsed "BAL" or "Basic Assembler Language |
||
Line 146:
::::I always heard it called BAL, but then everyone I knew “migrated from the DOS/360 world to the OS/360 world.” [[User:Peter Flass|Peter Flass]] ([[User talk:Peter Flass|talk]]) 22:53, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::No one I knew in the OS/370 world called either the language or the assembler BAL. It was generally just known as "370 Assembly language" or "the IBM Assembler" or variations thereof. The textbook that was assigned in the class where I was first exposed to it was titled ''System/360–370 Assembler Language (OS)''. [[User:Wasted Time R|Wasted Time R]] ([[User talk:Wasted Time R|talk]]) 23:07, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
:::{{tq|For example, look at [http://zseries.marist.edu/enterprisesystemseducation/assemblerlanguageresources/Assembler.V2.alntext%20V2.00.pdf] - the language (per the footnote) is Basic Assembler Language}}. A footnote that starts out "Some people call it "BAL"..." doesn't strike me as a strong endorsement of the language's name being BAL/Basic Assembler Language. Following that up with "...but the language is not basic (nor is it BASIC) except in the sense that it can be fundamental to understanding the System z processor's operations." further weakens any such inferred endorsement.
:::The document in question speaks of it as just "Assembler language", starting with the title. [[User:Guy Harris|Guy Harris]] ([[User talk:Guy Harris|talk]]) 09:13, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
== Much of "General characteristics" amounts to "this is an [[assembly language]]" ==
| |||