Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #84130 > unrolled thread

What killed Smalltalk could kill Python

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-22 03:34 +1100
    Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Michiel Overtoom <motoom@xs4all.nl> - 2015-01-21 18:45 +0100
    Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2015-01-21 12:21 -0600
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-02-07 23:35 +0000
    Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-21 19:18 +0000
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 09:35 +1100
        Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-21 23:10 +0000
          Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-01-22 02:25 +0200
          Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2015-01-21 21:22 -0600
            Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-22 17:52 +0000
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Anthony Papillion <anthony@cajuntechie.org> - 2015-01-21 17:19 -0600
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 10:41 +1100
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python John Ladasky <john_ladasky@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-01-21 16:22 -0800
    Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Tim Daneliuk <tundra@tundraware.com> - 2015-01-21 17:37 -0600
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 10:55 +1100
        Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Tim Daneliuk <tundra@tundraware.com> - 2015-01-23 16:51 -0600
          Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2015-01-24 08:09 +0000
            Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 19:16 +1100
              Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2015-01-24 14:09 +0000
            Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2015-01-24 06:34 -0500
              Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2015-01-24 14:14 +0000
        Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 09:57 +1100
          Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Tim Daneliuk <tundra@tundraware.com> - 2015-01-26 14:18 -0600
        Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Tim Daneliuk <tundra@tundraware.com> - 2015-01-23 16:51 -0600
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2015-01-21 17:08 -0700
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-01-21 21:59 -0500
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 14:08 +1100
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Emil Oppeln-Bronikowski <emil@fuse.pl> - 2015-01-22 05:46 +0100
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2015-02-09 13:28 -0800
    Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-21 15:46 -0800
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 10:57 +1100
        Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 01:09 +0100
          Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python sohcahtoa82@gmail.com - 2015-01-21 17:00 -0800
          Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 12:36 +1100
          Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-21 17:38 -0800
            Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 12:45 +1100
              Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-21 18:53 -0800
                Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 13:59 +1100
                  Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-02-07 23:54 +0000
                    Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-08 11:57 +1100
                      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-08 18:59 +1100
                        Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-08 19:24 +1100
              Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 15:35 +1000
                Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 17:07 +1100
          Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2015-01-21 17:44 -0800
          Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-22 14:23 +1100
            Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 15:34 +1100
            Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 15:39 +1000
              Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python sohcahtoa82@gmail.com - 2015-01-23 14:48 -0800
                Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> - 2015-01-23 14:58 -0800
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 01:16 +0100
        Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-01-22 00:45 -0500
    Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-21 18:11 -0800
      Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-22 06:30 +0000
    Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2015-01-22 07:26 -0500
    Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Emil Oppeln-Bronikowski <emil@fuse.pl> - 2015-01-22 16:47 +0100
    Re: What killed Smalltalk could kill Python Tony the Tiger <tony@tiger.invalid> - 2015-01-23 18:04 +0000

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#85351

Chris Angelico wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Albert van der Horst
> <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> Not to mention that mostly a game is understood, not as something like
>> chess, but an FPS (first person shooter) game.
>> But that is real time programming, one league beyond beginners
>> procedural (sequential) or functional programming.
>> The result is either a disappointment or the illusion of having created
>> something while in fact one used a frame work where all the hard work
>> has been done.
> 
> Even worse, it's usually graphical. From what I've heard from
> companies and people that produce graphical games, there's at least as
> much work in creating assets (images, 3D models, textures, stuff) as
> there is in writing code. And that's before you even consider writing
> a storyline, which is something that I wouldn't expect a new
> programmer to worry too much about ("just go around shooting stuff up"
> makes a fine storyline), but which the best commercial games always
> put a lot of work into. (And it does improve the game significantly. I
> wouldn't have spent anything like as many hours on Alice: Madness
> Returns as I have if it didn't have the storyline it does.)

If a professional games company has their coders writing the plot and
designing the graphics, they deserve to fail. (Well, that's a bit harsh...
there's still room in the world for small indy companies, and even
one-person projects.) You hire artists to design your artwork, and writers
to write your story, and programmers to program your code. It is rare to
have one person able to do all three to professional quality.



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#85353

On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Steven D'Aprano
<steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
> If a professional games company has their coders writing the plot and
> designing the graphics, they deserve to fail. (Well, that's a bit harsh...
> there's still room in the world for small indy companies, and even
> one-person projects.) You hire artists to design your artwork, and writers
> to write your story, and programmers to program your code. It is rare to
> have one person able to do all three to professional quality.

Of course you do... in a pro company that can afford to have that many
people. As you say, some small companies double up; and this
discussion was in the context of someone saying "I want to learn
computer programming so I can write games", which usually implies a
one-person project. But if anything, that makes the point even
stronger: you do NOT want to start in as a programmer on a project
that'll require a lot more than just programming skill.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84320

On 22/01/2015 11:45 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> It's not a terrible justification for getting into programming. But
> writing games is (almost always) a terrible way to start programming.

However, modifying games, I would argue, is a great way. The 
ComputerCraft mod for Minecraft, for example, added Lua-based control of 
in-game entities. It allows new developers to focus on internal game 
logic without being overwhelmed by the set up required to make it work.

An extreme example is DoubleFine's Hack'n'Slash, wihch exposes its 
underlying logic in-game (also in Lua) and provides the user with tools 
to modify them: http://www.hacknslashthegame.com/

Initially the player starts off by modifying globals (to, say, add or 
remove entities from a room, or change their movement direction), and 
ends with them having full access to the game (but not engine) code.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84324

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 4:35 PM, alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 22/01/2015 11:45 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>> It's not a terrible justification for getting into programming. But
>> writing games is (almost always) a terrible way to start programming.
>
>
> However, modifying games, I would argue, is a great way. The ComputerCraft
> mod for Minecraft, for example, added Lua-based control of in-game entities.
> It allows new developers to focus on internal game logic without being
> overwhelmed by the set up required to make it work.
>

Yes, as long as you have the right structure. I wouldn't just say to
someone "here, have at it, you'll learn to program", but as part of a
properly-designed course, it could be a great way to teach coding.

There's a gentle spectrum from tweaking edit files ("I'm going to make
the shotgun deal ten times the damage") through those kinds of script
files up to actual full programming, and I think it can be a fine way
for someone to get started.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84170

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 01/21/2015 05:36 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "I want to become a programmer so I can make games" is, on the vast
>> majority of cases, the quote of someone who will never become a
>> programmer. Why should teachers reward that kind of thought?
> 
> How about "I want to become a programmer so my brother, 2.5 years
> older than me, won't be better than me any more"? Should that kind of
> thinking be rewarded? Because that's how I got started. My brother was
> being taught the basics of programming, I was jealous (being the
> second child will tend to produce that), and so at six years old, I
> started learning to code. And then a few years later, I wanted to
> learn C because my brother didn't know it (we'd both learned BASIC),
> and since I didn't have a C compiler, I learned 8086 Assembly Language
> instead, using DEBUG.EXE. Largely out of jealousy.

There is a difference between /your/ motivation to learn something, and teachers /pandering/ to such motivations.
There's nothing wrong with "I want to make games" as a personal driving factor, but the educational system should still
teach decent programming, not whatever piece of garbage will produce quick results at the expense of long-term productivity.

--
~Ethan~

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84179

Mario Figueiredo wrote:

> In article <mailman.17933.1421884677.18130.python-list@python.org>,
> rosuav@gmail.com says...
>> 
>> Bad idea. Better to pick a language that makes it easy to get things
>> right, and then work on the fun side with third-party libraries, than
>> to tempt people in with "hey look how easy it is to do X" and then
>> have them stuck with an inferior or flawed language. Too many people
>> already don't know the difference between UTF-16 and Unicode. Please,
>> educators, don't make it worse.
>> 
>> ChrisA
> 
> 
> Indeed. If games and funnies is what drive beginners into programming,
> that's fine. But the educational principles of programming shouldn't be
> trashed in the process. We need serious developers in today's complex
> application systems.

Sure, but are they the *only* kinds of programmers that we need? Isn't there 
room in the world for an open-source developer who creates Firefox plug-ins, 
sys admins who write shell-scripts, cubical workers who write Excel 
worksheets, etc? Why shouldn't my Aunt Tilly write a mobile phone app to 
manage her cheesecake recipes just the way she likes?

http://livecode.com/

Programming games is hard. Arguably, it's *much* harder than most beginners 
can deal with, unless you start with a specialist language designed with 
game-related primitives:

http://scratch.mit.edu/

Even text based games are hard, and arguably need their own specialist 
language:

http://inform7.com/

Modern games *are* part of "today's complex application systems", and games 
developers may need the same skills used by "serious developers":

- project management
- testing
- change control
- release management
- documentation
- networking
- user authentication


etc. I'd further argue that many games developers have to know *more* that 
the typical developer. As a Python programmer, I don't have to manage 
memory, but many games devs are often programming down close to the metal 
and do need to care about the sort of low-level issues (memory, graphics, 
network latency) that I only have the fuzziest concept of. You don't write a 
high-performance 3D physics engine in Python. (At least not yet.)


> Not uneducated programmers with nary a knowledge of
> Software Engineering. Besides if games and funnies are the only thing
> that can drive someone into programming, I'd rather not see that person
> become a developer.

That's a terribly judgemental and rather arrogant statement. If people have 
a passion for mathematics, and that leads them to take up programming and 
invent Mathematica, would you say the world would have been better off if 
they never became a programmer?

What we need is more programmers with a passion for their job, and if that 
means learning to write games, then so be it. One of the problems with "9 to 
5 code monkeys" is that programming is just a job for them. They do the 
absolute minimum they need to keep their job. They don't program for fun, or 
to learn new skills, or to solve problems. They go to user groups and forums 
like here only when they have a question they want answered, they take and 
take and take and they never give back.

I'd rather teach somebody passionate about writing games than somebody 
apathetic about programming, and I'd rather the games person became a 
programmer.


-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84182

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Steven D'Aprano
<steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
> What we need is more programmers with a passion for their job, and if that
> means learning to write games, then so be it. One of the problems with "9 to
> 5 code monkeys" is that programming is just a job for them. They do the
> absolute minimum they need to keep their job. They don't program for fun, or
> to learn new skills, or to solve problems. They go to user groups and forums
> like here only when they have a question they want answered, they take and
> take and take and they never give back.

Absolutely agree... as long as that passion results in solid
competence. Whether someone comes into programming because s/he wants
to write games, organize recipes, automate some specific task, or
prove some mathematical point, non-trivial programming nearly always
requires non-trivial effort. That's the same as any other skill (you
wouldn't expect to be able to build a car in a day, even if you've
been driving them for *ages* - like, say, two whole years - and have
this brilliant idea for how you could improve on every car on the
roads), but for some reason a lot of people think that computers
should be easy.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84322

On 22/01/2015 1:23 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Modern games *are* part of "today's complex application systems", and games
> developers may need the same skills used by "serious developers"

I wish more game developers would understand this. I've lost count of 
the number of games that have failed during development because all of 
the source code was stolen or destroyed. I've had arguments with game 
devs (some who've worked at some of the bigger studios) because they're 
convinced that nothing outside of game development has anything to teach 
them...when their (for eg) revision control entails zipping up their 
daily changes and emailing them to the rest of the team...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84411

On Thursday, January 22, 2015 at 9:39:53 PM UTC-8, alex23 wrote:
> On 22/01/2015 1:23 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > Modern games *are* part of "today's complex application systems", and games
> > developers may need the same skills used by "serious developers"
> 
> I wish more game developers would understand this. I've lost count of 
> the number of games that have failed during development because all of 
> the source code was stolen or destroyed. I've had arguments with game 
> devs (some who've worked at some of the bigger studios) because they're 
> convinced that nothing outside of game development has anything to teach 
> them...when their (for eg) revision control entails zipping up their 
> daily changes and emailing them to the rest of the team...

Could be worse.

I seem to recall an interview with someone from Blizzard Entertainment mentioning that the first Warcraft game (Released in 1994) was developed by passing around floppy disks with new code among the developers.

Though I imagine that was actually probably pretty common back then.

But yeah...if you have more than 1 developer, version control of some sort just isn't optional.  Having to manually merge changes is extremely tedious.  If you're a solo developer, its still a good idea.  Even if you don't take advantage of branching and undoing commits, it's good to at least have a backup of your code somewhere.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84416

On 1/23/2015 2:48 PM, sohcahtoa82@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, January 22, 2015 at 9:39:53 PM UTC-8, alex23 wrote:

> I seem to recall an interview with someone from Blizzard Entertainment mentioning that the first Warcraft game (Released in 1994) was developed by passing around floppy disks with new code among the developers.
>
> Though I imagine that was actually probably pretty common back then.
>

It even had a formal name -- sneakernet

Emile

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84164

In article <873873ae91.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net>, 
no.email@nospam.invalid says...
> 
> Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> writes:
> > In 2009, Robert Martin gave a talk at RailsConf titled "What Killed
> > Smalltalk Could Kill Ruby"...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YX3iRjKj7C0
> 
> That's an hour-long video; could someone who's watched it give a brief
> summary?
> 

In a nutshell, he argues, along with Ward Cunningham, that what killed 
Smalltalk was how easy you could create unclean code with it. "Unclean" 
in this context means Smalltalk didn't punish bad software design 
decisions that would eventually lead into complex code and unmanageable 
systems with zero options of code maintenance.

I don't have an opinion. I didn't know Smalltalk. I started my 
programming carrer around the early nineties as a Dbase and later 
Clipper programmer.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84191

On 1/21/2015 7:16 PM, Mario Figueiredo wrote:
> In article <873873ae91.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net>,
> no.email@nospam.invalid says...
>>
>> Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> writes:
>>> In 2009, Robert Martin gave a talk at RailsConf titled "What Killed
>>> Smalltalk Could Kill Ruby"...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YX3iRjKj7C0
>>
>> That's an hour-long video; could someone who's watched it give a brief
>> summary?
>>
>
> In a nutshell, he argues, along with Ward Cunningham, that what killed
> Smalltalk was how easy you could create unclean code with it. "Unclean"
> in this context means Smalltalk didn't punish bad software design
> decisions that would eventually lead into complex code and unmanageable
> systems with zero options of code maintenance.

He followed that by saying that fine-grained test-driven development is 
the way to prevent unholy messes.  He noted that tdd started in 
smalltalk, but never really took there.

Reason 2: arrogance -- the walled garden and disdain for the messy 
problems of real enterprises. He did not seem as sure about how to 
counteract this.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84172

On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 at 10:34:40 AM UTC-6, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> In 2009, Robert Martin gave a talk at RailsConf titled
> "What Killed Smalltalk Could Kill Ruby". (No cheering,
> that sort of attitude is one of the things that killed
> Smalltalk.) Although Martin discusses Ruby, the lessons
> could also apply to Python.

Python is already headed towards obscurity. The fall began
with the release of Python3000 (from which we "might" have
recovered), but now it seems that GvR intends to drive the
final nail in python's coffin with this "type hinting" crap
that will convert Python syntax from a readable pseudo code
into a cryptic nightmare.

Type hinting violates the very *ESSENCE* of what Python was
meant to be, that is: a "clean and intuitive syntax". The
cleanness of Python is what attracts people to it, and the
hook is set when they discover the breadth of the stdlib.

If GvR brings this gawd awful type hinting idea to reality,
IT'S OVER! Python will be lost forever to history as just
another "interesting oddity". Time to call up the Robert 
Ripley estate and request some space in his museum!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84199

On 22/01/2015 02:11, Rick Johnson wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 at 10:34:40 AM UTC-6, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> In 2009, Robert Martin gave a talk at RailsConf titled
>> "What Killed Smalltalk Could Kill Ruby". (No cheering,
>> that sort of attitude is one of the things that killed
>> Smalltalk.) Although Martin discusses Ruby, the lessons
>> could also apply to Python.
>
> Python is already headed towards obscurity. The fall began
> with the release of Python3000 (from which we "might" have
> recovered), but now it seems that GvR intends to drive the
> final nail in python's coffin with this "type hinting" crap
> that will convert Python syntax from a readable pseudo code
> into a cryptic nightmare.
>
> Type hinting violates the very *ESSENCE* of what Python was
> meant to be, that is: a "clean and intuitive syntax". The
> cleanness of Python is what attracts people to it, and the
> hook is set when they discover the breadth of the stdlib.
>
> If GvR brings this gawd awful type hinting idea to reality,
> IT'S OVER! Python will be lost forever to history as just
> another "interesting oddity". Time to call up the Robert
> Ripley estate and request some space in his museum!
>

April 1st already?

Or will Python be saved by RickedPython3?

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84228

On Wednesday 21 January 2015 23:46:09 Emil Oppeln-Bronikowski did opine
And Gene did reply:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:55:27AM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > Where's REXX today?
> 
> Still (somehow) alive in neo-Amiga platforms like AmigaOS4.x, MorphOS
> and AROS. I know that's as good as dead but there are still people
> writing AREXX glue code.

He asked about REXX, not AREXX. There is no comparison between the two as 
AREXX was a huge superset of REXX.

I have co-written some rather widely distributed amiga code in AREXX, then 
compiled it to standalone with RexxPlus.

When I switched platforms to linux in 1998, the first thing I did was to 
go find an AREXX for linux.  But had to settle for IBM's REXX/Regina, 
which wasn't capable of running any of our AREXX code.  AREXX hooked into 
the OS and there wasn't anything I ever wanted to do that could not be 
done in AREXX.

REXX/Regina is an extremely emasculated language that has zero connection 
into the os, and I found it completely useless when compared to AREXX.

If, when anyone here was using an amiga, and was using EzCron to schedule 
stuff, Jim Hines and I wrote it as there was no such scheduler for 
amigados.  Everything else we laid our hands on killed time by 
busywaiting, killing the machines performance. EzCron put itself to sleep 
intelligently by asking what time it was, and then sleeping until the 
first second of the next minute. That we published at the time, and then 
built on that for EzHome, which was a dumber version of what we call heyu 
today.

Trivia bit: William Hawes, who wrote AREXX and sold it thru the commode 
door sales channels, was never paid a dime for his work. But those 2 guys 
screwed everybody. He had an account on kernel.org in 1998, might still 
have, but it was empty then and the last time I looked, probably 5 years 
ago.

So I have no clue what a very talented programmer is doing for a living 
today. To me, that sad as hell.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
US V Castleman, SCOTUS, Mar 2014 is grounds for Impeaching SCOTUS

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84237

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 07:26:31AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:

> > Still (somehow) alive in neo-Amiga platforms like AmigaOS4.x, MorphOS
> > and AROS. I know that's as good as dead but there are still people
> > writing AREXX glue code.
> He asked about REXX, not AREXX. There is no comparison between the two as 
> AREXX was a huge superset of REXX.

Never seeing a proper REXX I always assumed it's just Amiga port retrofitted to serve as OS' needs as IPC language.

You learn everyday.

> If, when anyone here was using an amiga, and was using EzCron to schedule 
> stuff, Jim Hines and I wrote it as there was no such scheduler for 
> amigados.

I used few cron-like daemons and the name rings a bell!

> Trivia bit: William Hawes, who wrote AREXX and sold it thru the commode 
> door sales channels, was never paid a dime for his work.

There are still problems with AREXX copyright/distribution, but as you can guess after few changes of hand Amiga's IP is mess.

AROS, begin FOSS reimplementation of AmigaOS API, uses Regina to replace AREXX

http://regina-rexx.sourceforge.net/
-- 
vag·a·bond adjective \ˈva-gə-ˌbänd\
 a :  of, relating to, or characteristic of a wanderer 
 b :  leading an unsettled, irresponsible, or disreputable life

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#84376

On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 03:34:26 +1100, Steven D'Aprano wrote:

> Youngsters

At 55? Doubt it. Still never used that lingo, however.


 /Grrr
-- 
          ___                  ___
 (\_--_/)  | _ ._    _|_|_  _   |o _  _ ._
 ( 9  9 )  |(_)| |\/  |_| |(/_  ||(_|(/_|
 stripes are forever - as overripe ferrets

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web