Content deleted Content added
some redundancies cannot be eliminated by subroutines |
|||
Line 99:
I suspect that lots of people skim over that last question and misunderstand it -- how can I improve the article by clarifying it?
--[[Special:Contributions/68.0.124.33|68.0.124.33]] ([[User talk:68.0.124.33|talk]]) 14:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
*I agree that the statement is a bit vague; I had to reread it several times to figure out what it actually meant. I think that phrasing it as a question makes it more ambiguous, and also doesn't really make sense in terms of style - which is why I changed it before. I see now, though, that what I changed it to doesn't really mean the same thing.
:How about simply:
:: ''Some early computers such as the RCA 1802 required several instructions to call a subroutine. In the top-level application and in many subroutines, that sequence is repeated over and over again, only the subroutine address changing from one call to the next. Threaded code was invented to reduce this redundancy.''
:[[User:Mistercow|mistercow]] ([[User talk:Mistercow|talk]]) 06:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
| |||