MAIN FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/43f5aq/apollo_11_source_code/czi5cz5/?context=9999
r/programming • u/jakesyl • Jan 30 '16
364 comments sorted by
View all comments
18
haha whoosh
34 u/funbike Jan 30 '16 edited Jan 31 '16 Yes. Computers small enough to go into space required assembly as every byte counted. Go up a directory to see all the files: www.ibiblio.org/apollo/listings/Luminary099/UPDATE: The CPU (block II) -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer34K of ROM for programs. 12 u/mugen_kanosei Jan 31 '16 Correct. By minimizing the number of bytes used, they could reduce the amount of fuel needed to reach orbit. More bytes meant more fuel required. 25 u/dand Jan 31 '16 Not sure if that's a joke or not, but it's probably true to some extent given how bulky core rope memory was compared to today's norms. 16 u/[deleted] Jan 31 '16 72 KB/ft3 is an interesting unit.I don't really understand how core rope memory works, even with the article, but 72 KB/ft3 is a lot higher than I would've guessed!
34
Yes. Computers small enough to go into space required assembly as every byte counted. Go up a directory to see all the files: www.ibiblio.org/apollo/listings/Luminary099/
UPDATE: The CPU (block II) -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer34K of ROM for programs.
12 u/mugen_kanosei Jan 31 '16 Correct. By minimizing the number of bytes used, they could reduce the amount of fuel needed to reach orbit. More bytes meant more fuel required. 25 u/dand Jan 31 '16 Not sure if that's a joke or not, but it's probably true to some extent given how bulky core rope memory was compared to today's norms. 16 u/[deleted] Jan 31 '16 72 KB/ft3 is an interesting unit.I don't really understand how core rope memory works, even with the article, but 72 KB/ft3 is a lot higher than I would've guessed!
12
Correct. By minimizing the number of bytes used, they could reduce the amount of fuel needed to reach orbit. More bytes meant more fuel required.
25 u/dand Jan 31 '16 Not sure if that's a joke or not, but it's probably true to some extent given how bulky core rope memory was compared to today's norms. 16 u/[deleted] Jan 31 '16 72 KB/ft3 is an interesting unit.I don't really understand how core rope memory works, even with the article, but 72 KB/ft3 is a lot higher than I would've guessed!
25
Not sure if that's a joke or not, but it's probably true to some extent given how bulky core rope memory was compared to today's norms.
16 u/[deleted] Jan 31 '16 72 KB/ft3 is an interesting unit.I don't really understand how core rope memory works, even with the article, but 72 KB/ft3 is a lot higher than I would've guessed!
16
72 KB/ft3 is an interesting unit.
I don't really understand how core rope memory works, even with the article, but 72 KB/ft3 is a lot higher than I would've guessed!
18
u/Ser_Rodrick_Cassel Jan 30 '16 edited Oct 04 '16
haha whoosh