Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!munnari.oz.au!ditmela!yarra!bohra!ejp
From: ejp@bohra.cpg.oz (Esmond Pitt)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: Punched Cards
Message-ID: <124@bohra.cpg.oz>
Date: 5 Jun 90 00:56:41 GMT
References: <12546@netcom.UUCP> <220@taumet.COM> <12573@netcom.UUCP> <898@nlsun1.oracle.nl> <1990May29.132631.2253@pdn.paradyne.com> <1990May30.065025.25861@diku.dk> <1990Jun1.211352.4749@unhtel.uucp> <5157@stpstn.UUCP>
Reply-To: ejp@bohra.cpg.oz.au (Esmond Pitt)
Organization: Computer Power Group, Melb, Australia
Lines: 23

In article <5157@stpstn.UUCP> lerman@stpstn.UUCP (Ken Lerman) writes:
>In the "Good Old Days", Fortran was punched in columns 1-72 of the 80
>column card with 73-80 used for (an optional) sequence number.

So was COBOL, assembler, ... It was a Hollerith card convention.

>As I recall, the 7090 class machine had a 36 bit word and could thus
>contain 24 words of data (in binary mode) plus have an 8 character
>sequence number.

I do not understand this statement.

Anyway, as the 36 bits were divided into 6 6-bit (EBCDIC) characters,
the arithmetic is really 72 columns = 12 words, 8 columns = 1.3333...  words .

>Does anyone out there know if these two "facts" are related?

Doesn't sound like it.


-- 
Esmond Pitt, Computer Power Group
ejp@bohra.cpg.oz
D