Language – Mnemonic

The Collins Dictionary says:

Mnemonic

(Countable noun)

A mnemonic is a word, short poem, or sentence that is intended to help you remember things such as scientific rules or spelling rules.

For example, ‘i before e, except after c’ is a mnemonic to help people remember how to spell words like ‘ believe’ and ‘ receive’.

…mnemonic devices. 

Dictionary.com says:

Mnemonic      

(Adjective)

1. assisting or intended to assist the memory.

2. pertaining to mnemonics or to memory.

….

In Data Access v Powerflex Services [1999] HCA 49; 202 CLR 1; 166 ALR 228; 73 ALJR 1435 (30 September 1999), Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Gummow and Hayne JJ. said at [5]:

In Computer Edge Pty Ltd v Apple Computer Inc[5], Gibbs CJ gave a more detailed account of the general nature of a computer program and how it causes a computer to function. Substantial developments and improvements to computers and computer technology have occurred since the trial of that action in 1983[6]. For example, evidence in that case appears to have shown that the first stages of a construction of the programs in 1977 were handwritten[7], whereas many programs are now written entirely on computer[8]. Nevertheless, much of what was said by Gibbs CJ remains relevant. His Honour said[9]:

“Computer science makes much use of jargon and metaphor, and to enable the matters in issue to be understood it seems desirable to attempt a brief explanation of the meaning of some of the expressions used in that science and to describe the manner in which a computer program is developed. A computer program is a set of instructions designed to cause a computer to perform a particular function or to produce a particular result. A program is usually developed in a number of stages. First, the sequence of operations which the computer will be required to perform is commonly written out in ordinary language, with the help, if necessary, of mathematical formulae and of a flow chart and diagram representing the procedure. In the present case if any writing in ordinary language (other than the comments and labels mentioned below) was produced in the production of Applesoft and Autostart, no question now arises concerning it. Next there is prepared what is called a source program. The instructions are now expressed in a computer language – either in a source code (which is not far removed from ordinary language, and is hence called a high level language) or in an assembly code (a low level language, which is further removed from ordinary language than a source code), or successively in both. Sometimes the expression source code seems to be used to include both high level and low level language. In the present case, the source programs were written in an assembly code, comprising four elements, viz. – (a) labels identifying particular parts of the program; (b) mnemonics each consisting of three letters of the alphabet and corresponding to a particular operation expressed in 6502 Assembly Code (the code used); (c) mnemonics identifying the register in the micro-processor and/or the number of instructions in the program to which the operation referred to in (b) related; and (d) comments intended to explain the function of the particular part of the program for the benefit of a human reader of the program. The writing has been destroyed, although it is possible to reconstruct the mnemonics, but not the labels and comments, which were comprised in it.

The source code or assembly code cannot be used directly in the computer, and must be converted into an object code, which is ‘machine readable’, i.e., which can be directly used in the computer. The conversion is effected by a computer, itself properly programmed. The program in object code, the object program, in the first instance consists of a sequence of electrical impulses which are often first stored on a magnetic disc or tape, and which may be stored permanently in a ROM (‘read only memory’), a silicon chip which contains thousands of connected electrical circuits. The object code is embodied in the ROM in such a way that when the ROM is installed in the computer and electrical power is applied, there is generated the sequence of electrical impulses which cause the computer to take the action which the program is designed to achieve. The pattern of the circuits in the ROM may possibly be discerned with the aid of an electron microscope but it cannot be seen by the naked eye. Obviously, the electrical impulses themselves cannot be perceived. However the sequence of electrical impulses may be described either in binary notation (using the symbols 0 and 1) or in hexadecimal notation (using the numbers 0-9 and the letters A-F), and it is possible to display the description on the visual display unit of the computer, and to print it out on paper. And, as has been said, it is also possible to reconstruct the mnemonics in the source code. It will have been seen from this account that a program exists successively in source code and in object code, but the object code need not be written out in binary or hexadecimal notation in the process of producing and storing the program.”

….

In Fenwick v Wambo Coal Pty Ltd [2011] NSWSC 176 (18 March 2011), White J said at [43]:

A further relevant consideration is the need to maintain respect for the court’s authority. In Aon Risk Services Australia Limited v Australian National University [2009] HCA 27; (2009) 239 CLR 175 at [30], French CJ observed that the potential for loss of public confidence in the legal system which arises if a court is seen to accede to applications made without adequate explanation or justification is a relevant consideration in dealing with applications for adjournment, or for amendments giving rise to adjournment, or the vacation of trial dates or the like. Bryson J (as his Honour then was) put the matter eloquently in Hartigan v International Society for Krishna Consciousness Inc [1999] NSWSC 57 at [11]. His Honour said:

“‘Court efficiency’ is a terse mnemonic indeed for the public and private interests involved in conducting Court business according to a known and predictable course, on which expensive preparations can reasonably be based, and with due use of publicly-owned resources, paid for by taxation levied under stern laws and for the most part out of the proceeds of personal exertion of persons who make no use of the Court. A lengthy exposition could be made of what is involved in Court efficiency, with an examination of the adverse impact on the private interests of other litigants in the instant proceedings, of other litigants who are claiming the Court’s attention, and in the public interest in maintaining the Court’s authority by observance of arrangements with which the Court has directed litigants to comply. There is a public interest in the Court’s requiring litigants to respect the due exercise of its compulsory powers over litigants, and in itself acting in the same way, and in maintenance of faith with persons who have expended time and energy to conform with the Court’s directions. It is injurious to the respect which the Court and others should maintain for the Court’s authority if arrangements made with care are set aside for the benefit of persons who have not complied with the rules of Court.”

….