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

Groups > comp.sys.acorn.misc > #2965 > unrolled thread

Gove in a virtual world

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.acorn.misc

Contents

  Gove in a virtual world ChrisF <c.n.l.f@virgin.net> - 2011-12-15 20:47 +0000
    Re: Gove in a virtual world Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2011-12-15 20:53 +0000
      Re: Gove in a virtual world Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2011-12-15 21:06 +0000
        Re: Gove in a virtual world Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2011-12-15 22:19 +0000
          Re: Gove in a virtual world Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2011-12-16 07:18 +0000
          Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-16 09:14 +0100
            Re: Gove in a virtual world charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2011-12-16 09:34 +0000
            Re: Gove in a virtual world Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2011-12-16 10:46 +0000
              Re: Gove in a virtual world Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-12-17 14:48 +0000
                Re: Gove in a virtual world Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2011-12-17 15:10 +0000
              Re: Gove in a virtual world Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2011-12-18 09:20 +0000
                Re: Gove in a virtual world Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2011-12-19 11:36 +0000
            Re: Gove in a virtual world jgharston <jgh@arcade.demon.co.uk> - 2011-12-16 07:04 -0800
              Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-17 08:46 +0100
          Re: Gove in a virtual world M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-16 11:07 +0000
            Re: Gove in a virtual world Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2011-12-16 13:44 +0000
              Re: Gove in a virtual world M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-16 17:02 +0000
                Re: Gove in a virtual world Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2011-12-16 19:20 +0000
                Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-17 10:17 +0100
                  Re: Gove in a virtual world "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2011-12-17 10:35 +0100
              Re: Gove in a virtual world Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-12-17 14:57 +0000
            Re: Gove in a virtual world workstuff@mail.com - 2011-12-16 21:12 +0100
              Re: Gove in a virtual world M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-17 13:04 +0000
                Re: Gove in a virtual world Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-12-18 07:50 +0000
                  Re: Gove in a virtual world M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-18 15:31 +0000
                Re: Gove in a virtual world workstuff@mail.com - 2011-12-18 22:27 +0100
                  Re: Gove in a virtual world Patric Albutat <albutat@gmx.de> - 2011-12-19 01:32 +0100
                  Re: Gove in a virtual world M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-19 12:32 +0000
                    Re: Gove in a virtual world workstuff@mail.com - 2011-12-19 14:22 +0100
                    Re: Gove in a virtual world Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-12-19 14:00 +0000
                      Re: Gove in a virtual world nervus <nervus@spam.nl> - 2011-12-19 19:59 +0100
                        Re: Gove in a virtual world M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-19 20:13 +0000
                          Re: Gove in a virtual world nervus <nervus@spam.nl> - 2011-12-19 21:35 +0100
                            Re: Gove in a virtual world M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-19 21:05 +0000
                              Re: Gove in a virtual world nervus <nervus@spam.nl> - 2011-12-19 22:10 +0100
                          Re: Gove in a virtual world Bryn Evans <d@a.invalid> - 2011-12-20 16:42 +0000
                      Re: Gove in a virtual world Barry Gray <barrygray@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-12-20 23:12 +0000
                        Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-21 08:07 +0100
                          Re: Gove in a virtual world Barry Gray <barrygray@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-12-21 09:33 +0000
                            Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-21 18:10 +0100
                              Re: Gove in a virtual world Patric Albutat <albutat@gmx.de> - 2011-12-21 20:46 +0100
                                Re: Gove in a virtual world SG nws <nwsgrp@ntlworld.com> - 2011-12-21 21:21 +0000
                            Re: Gove in a virtual world John <newsmcc@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-12-21 14:00 +0000
                            Re: Gove in a virtual world Chris <decordova@ukgateway.net> - 2011-12-24 19:46 +0100
                    Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-20 06:26 +0100
              Re: Gove in a virtual world Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-12-18 08:15 +0000
            Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-17 09:41 +0100
              Re: Gove in a virtual world M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-17 15:21 +0000
              Re: Gove in a virtual world Matthew Phillips <spam2011m@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-17 21:24 +0000
                Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-18 08:09 +0100
                  Re: Gove in a virtual world Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-12-18 10:32 +0000
                  Re: Gove in a virtual world trevj <trevj@cwazy.co.uk> - 2011-12-20 07:45 -0800
                    Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-21 08:08 +0100
            Re: Gove in a virtual world Matthew Phillips <spam2011m@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-17 10:33 +0000
              Re: Gove in a virtual world M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-17 15:46 +0000
            Re: Gove in a virtual world Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-12-17 15:37 +0000
            Re: Gove in a virtual world Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-12-18 08:23 +0000
              Re: Gove in a virtual world "Bruce Goatly" <ss4@goatly.co.uk> - 2011-12-18 10:42 +0000
                Re: Gove in a virtual world M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-18 15:58 +0000
          Re: Gove in a virtual world druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-12-17 12:17 +0000
            Re: Gove in a virtual world Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2011-12-17 12:47 +0000
              Re: Gove in a virtual world charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2011-12-17 12:57 +0000
                Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-17 19:08 +0100
            Re: Gove in a virtual world M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-17 12:51 +0000
              Re: Gove in a virtual world Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2011-12-17 15:17 +0000
              Re: Gove in a virtual world druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-12-17 18:02 +0000
                Re: Gove in a virtual world NedA <news@ned.uk.invalid> - 2011-12-18 10:18 +0000
                  Re: Gove in a virtual world druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-12-18 18:25 +0000
                Re: Gove in a virtual world Steve Drain <steve@kappa.me.uk> - 2011-12-19 11:40 +0000
                  Re: Gove in a virtual world druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-12-20 23:17 +0000
                Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-20 06:51 +0100
                  Re: Gove in a virtual world cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2011-12-20 10:07 +0000
                    Re: Gove in a virtual world druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-12-20 23:20 +0000
                      Re: Gove in a virtual world Brian Jordan <brian.jordan9@btinternet.com> - 2011-12-21 00:43 +0000
                      Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-21 08:16 +0100
                        Re: Gove in a virtual world druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-12-21 12:22 +0000
                          Re: Gove in a virtual world Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2011-12-21 17:20 +0000
                            Re: Gove in a virtual world cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2011-12-22 10:36 +0000
                              Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-23 07:19 +0100
                      Re: Gove in a virtual world cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2011-12-21 11:00 +0000
                        Re: Gove in a virtual world druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-12-21 12:25 +0000
                          Re: Gove in a virtual world Brian Jordan <brian.jordan9@btinternet.com> - 2011-12-21 13:23 +0000
                        Re: Gove in a virtual world  <cujimmy@nospam.co.uk> - 2011-12-21 19:50 +0000
                        Re: Gove in a virtual world druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-12-21 22:13 +0000
                          Re: Gove in a virtual world cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2011-12-26 10:50 +0000
                  Re: Gove in a virtual world druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-12-21 11:58 +0000
                    Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-21 19:11 +0100
                      Re: Gove in a virtual world Steve Drain <steve@kappa.me.uk> - 2011-12-21 22:18 +0000
                        Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-23 07:38 +0100
                          Re: Gove in a virtual world Steve Drain <steve@kappa.me.uk> - 2011-12-23 12:31 +0000
                            APOLOGY to Steve Drain Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-24 05:52 +0100
                              Structures in BASIC Steve Drain <steve@kappa.me.uk> - 2011-12-24 11:38 +0000
                    Re: Gove in a virtual world Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2011-12-21 18:35 +0000
                      Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-23 07:32 +0100
                        Re: Gove in a virtual world Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2011-12-23 09:58 +0000
                          Re: Gove in a virtual world Brian Howlett <news-spamtrap@brianhowlett.me.uk> - 2011-12-23 10:12 +0000
                            Re: Gove in a virtual world Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2011-12-23 10:31 +0000
                            Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-24 05:55 +0100
                          Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-24 05:56 +0100
            Re: Gove in a virtual world M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-18 16:17 +0000
              Re: Gove in a virtual world Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-20 07:24 +0100

Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  Next page →

#2993

In article <jci18t$e56$1@dont-email.me>,
   druck <news@druck.org.uk> wrote:
> On 15/12/2011 22:19, Alan Calder wrote:
> > On the matter of Ancient and extinct in the wild languages, I believe that
> > they are of great historical and cultural interest and should be given the
> > same status as other ancient or non-European languages such as Sanskrit,
> > Anglo-Saxon, Classical Arabic, Icelandic, Mandarin, Kazakh, Japanese, Old
> > East Slavic, Russian, Amharic and the like.

> Arhurm! The only ancient languages we should be speaking around here is 
> BBC BASIC and 6502 assembler.

Ah, I knew you were listening!  Sadly nobody's come back with the Latin for
the verb to druck.  I druck, you druck, he drucks, she drucks, we
druck...you get the idea.

Seasonal greetings!

Alan

-- 
Alan Calder, Milton Keynes, UK.

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

#2994

In article <524301687ealan_calder@o2.co.uk>,
   Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> wrote:

[Snip]

> Ah, I knew you were listening!  Sadly nobody's come back with the Latin
> for the verb to druck. 

I regret only having a Latin > English dictionary.

-- 
From KT24 

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.16 

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

#3005

On 17/12/2011 13:57, charles wrote:

>> Ah, I knew you were listening!  Sadly nobody's come back with the Latin
>> for the verb to druck.
> I regret only having a Latin>  English dictionary.

translate.google.com ?

I can't vouch for its accuracy, but it is better than inventing 
pseudolatin - druckicus, druckorum, druckae, etc etc... ;-) [*]


Best wishes,

Rick.

* - probably obvious that the closest I got to Latin was Up Pompeii!

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

#2996

In article <jci18t$e56$1@dont-email.me>,
   druck <news@druck.org.uk> wrote:
> On 15/12/2011 22:19, Alan Calder wrote:
> > On the matter of Ancient and extinct in the wild languages, I
> > believe that they are of great historical and cultural interest
> > and should be given the same status as other ancient or
> > non-European languages such as Sanskrit, Anglo-Saxon, Classical
> > Arabic, Icelandic, Mandarin, Kazakh, Japanese, Old East Slavic,
> > Russian, Amharic and the like.

> Arhurm! The only ancient languages we should be speaking around
> here is BBC BASIC and 6502 assembler.

Yes but, Druck, with which computer language do you start getting
those now at school to pick up an interest in programming? Do you go
straight into a complex language (c.f. Chinese, Russian) or do you
start with an easy one (BBC BASIC c.f. Latin) which will enable them
to progress up the scale of complexity even though some consider it
dead?

> ---druck

Fugete! Druckati sumus! *
* Latin for: Run for it! We've been drucked!

Michael Harding
Rev. Preb. M.D. Harding   riscos@mdharding.org.uk

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

#3000

In article <524301c51criscos@mdharding.org.uk>,
   M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> wrote:

[Snip]

> Fugete! Druckati sumus! *
> * Latin for: Run for it! We've been drucked!

Ah, thanks for that, Michael!  Good to know it.

Thunderbolts will fall amongst us.

Alan

[Snip]

-- 
Alan Calder, Milton Keynes, UK.

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

#3004

On 17/12/2011 12:51, M Harding wrote:
> In article<jci18t$e56$1@dont-email.me>,
>     druck<news@druck.org.uk>  wrote:
>> Arhurm! The only ancient languages we should be speaking around
>> here is BBC BASIC and 6502 assembler.
>
> Yes but, Druck, with which computer language do you start getting
> those now at school to pick up an interest in programming? Do you go
> straight into a complex language (c.f. Chinese, Russian) or do you
> start with an easy one (BBC BASIC c.f. Latin) which will enable them
> to progress up the scale of complexity even though some consider it
> dead?

Well I wouldn't start with BASIC if you wanted to go to C, and I 
wouldn't start with C if you wanted to go to C++.

Although BASIC can teach you a few of the fundamentals of the use of 
variables, branches and looping constructs, it just doesn't have the 
tools to interact with modern APIs such as structured variables, and 
proper memory management. Once you've got past the basics, it's nasty 
rather than fun.

Whilst learning the C syntax will put you in good stead for a verity of 
languages such as C++, perl and python, if you don't start out doing 
object orientated programming, it's very hard to start doing it 
properly. I'm very glad I started on C++ and moved to C afterwards 
(mainly for embedded work, but also for RISC OS before gcc was 
available), that way I've always constructed OO designs and implemented 
them in C regardless.

If I were to recommend a language to start on these days, it would be C# 
(yes I know it's Microsoft, but that's what is used in Schools, and 
there is Mono on Linux if you are suitably masochistic). It's object 
orientated, it's close to both C++ and Java, but without a lot of the 
nastiness (leaving out much of the C baggage which C++ has to carry), 
and results in very tidy and well structured code, which will put you in 
good stead for moving between any of those languages. The facilities 
.NET framework is very comprehensive, and it is extremely straight 
forward to pull in and use other code libraries (no header file and 
linking nightmares).

Something that is an advantage for the beginner, but also a disadvantage 
for more advanced use, is that it's a managed language i.e. the run time 
controls all the memory allocation, disposal and garbage collection, so 
it wont teach the discipline needed to be an embedded programmer.

---druck

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

#3020

In article <jcilfs$2va$1@dont-email.me>,
   druck <news@druck.org.uk> wrote:

[Snip]


> If I were to recommend a language to start on these days,
> it would be C# (yes I know it's Microsoft, but that's what
> is used in Schools, and there is Mono on Linux if you are
> suitably masochistic). It's object orientated, it's close
> to both C++ and Java, but without a lot of the nastiness
> (leaving out much of the C baggage which C++ has to carry),
> and results in very tidy and well structured code, which
> will put you in good stead for moving between any of those
> languages. The facilities .NET framework is very
> comprehensive, and it is extremely straight forward to
> pull in and use other code libraries (no header file and
> linking nightmares).

> Something that is an advantage for the beginner, but also a
> disadvantage for more advanced use, is that it's a managed
> language i.e. the run time controls all the memory
> allocation, disposal and garbage collection, so it wont
> teach the discipline needed to be an embedded programmer.

Druck many thanks for a very informative post - causing me to
look at Mono again.

-- 
besters
Ned

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

#3029

On 18/12/2011 10:18, NedA wrote:
> In article<jcilfs$2va$1@dont-email.me>,
>     druck<news@druck.org.uk>  wrote:
>> If I were to recommend a language to start on these days,
>> it would be C# (yes I know it's Microsoft, but that's what
>> is used in Schools, and there is Mono on Linux if you are
>> suitably masochistic).

> Druck many thanks for a very informative post - causing me to
> look at Mono again.

It's well worth a look, but if working on a commercial sized project; do 
expect to be bitten on the arse at least once due to mono working 
slightly differently than .NET. But as it's open source it's usually 
been fixed in a version released since you started, and if not you can 
always contribute a patch.

---druck

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

#3034

On 17/12/2011 18:02, druck wrote:
> Although BASIC can teach you a few of the fundamentals of the use of
> variables, branches and looping constructs, it just doesn't have the
> tools to interact with modern APIs such as structured variables,

Watch this space; BASIC can do many things if you want it to; cf the 
universal Turing machine.

> and proper memory management.

There are a lot of ways to manage memory beyond the elementary DIM. You 
can chose among a handful of modules, use one of many libraries or write 
your own fairly simply. I have been using a single function to provide 
the equivalent of malloc and realloc for a dozen years. All that, and 
not a mention of B*****. ;-)

> Once you've got past the basics, it's nasty rather than fun.

I enjoy using it, but I agree that it may not be the best language to 
start with. I taught, and still have a liking for, Logo and the case for 
that was made many years ago in Brainstorms by Seymour Papert.

> Whilst learning the C syntax will put you in good stead for a verity of
> languages such as C++, perl and python, if you don't start out doing
> object orientated programming, it's very hard to start doing it
> properly.

It is quite hard to get your head round properly and not just force the 
syntax into previously learned patterns.

> If I were to recommend a language to start on these days, it would be C#
> (yes I know it's Microsoft, but that's what is used in Schools, and
> there is Mono on Linux if you are suitably masochistic). It's object
> orientated, it's close to both C++ and Java

I would like to use Java, and I once made a good start into organising 
BASIC into a very Java-like form. It is a pity that it cannot be used 
under RISC OS.

Steve

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

#3058

On 19/12/2011 11:40, Steve Drain wrote:
> On 17/12/2011 18:02, druck wrote:
>> Although BASIC can teach you a few of the fundamentals of the use of
>> variables, branches and looping constructs, it just doesn't have the
>> tools to interact with modern APIs such as structured variables,
>
> Watch this space; BASIC can do many things if you want it to; cf the
> universal Turing machine.

Any language can implement the universal turning machine, and a turing 
machine can compute any computable program, but the machine itself is 
the last thing you would want to do anything useful in!

---druck

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

#3049

On 17/12/2011 19:02, druck wrote:

> Well I wouldn't start with BASIC if you wanted to go to C, and I
> wouldn't start with C if you wanted to go to C++.

I'm afraid I am broken. BASIC -> C -> Assembler.

My Uncle wrote a book or two on C++ ("Working Classes", some punny name 
like that) and I recall reading it and wondering what the big deal was. 
Okay, having "object.method" is tidier than functions with global scope, 
but as a means to an end, both arrive at the same destination


> tools to interact with modern APIs such as structured variables, and

Structured variables? You mean an array like C's struct ? Yes, that is 
something that would be nice, but it is fairly easily faked with memory 
indirection and a wrapper function (to take care of it all in one place).


> proper memory management.

What's wrong with grabbing a wodge of memory and running your own 
allocator? Then you'll know if it is braindead (allocates, frees) or 
intelligent (allocates, frees, compacts) which may be important if you 
think you have a pointer to a block of memory to know if it has moved or 
not. It's not hard to use an indirected pointer where the pointer points 
to a few words, one of which is the base address. An LDR will pick that up.


> Once you've got past the basics, it's nasty rather than fun.

BASIC is quite satisfying. You just shouldn't expect too much from it.


> if you don't start out doing object orientated programming, it's
> very hard to start doing it properly.

True. I've mostly ignored OO. It just seems, to me, to be a bother that 
can be overcome by knowing what you are attempting to do before you 
begin coding.

[but, then, I never felt GOTO was inherently evil, it's just a JMP by 
another name; the evil is in dialects of programming languages where 
GOTO (and the related GOSUB) are the *only* tools you have for branching 
to different parts of the program]


> (yes I know it's Microsoft, but that's what is used in Schools,

How about we think of what is going to be the best for learning the 
principles of programming, instead of "what is used in schools"? Back in 
my day, the course was TurboPascal. I wrote a bunch of stuff in Pascal, 
before I discovered the flexibility of C. And I can confidently saw that 
I have not come across any code I've needed to fiddle with that was 
actually written in Pascal. I hope I've forgotten it, it was useful to 
enforce a better understanding of data types and structures than BASIC, 
plus a more formal use of libraries than BASIC, but otherwise it was 
mostly a waste of braincells. I might as well have learned Latin. :-P I 
think it would have been better to have learned C in the first place, at 
least C is used for stuff, even if it does have its lurking evils.


> so it wont teach the discipline needed to be an embedded programmer.

I think that's a rather specialist field. I, for one, would like my 
car's braking system to be designed by somebody who knows their subject 
a heck of a lot deeper than any school course could teach.


Best wishes,

Rick.

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

#3051

In message <4ef02260$0$2525$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr>
          Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> On 17/12/2011 19:02, druck wrote:
> 
> > Well I wouldn't start with BASIC if you wanted to go to C, and I
> > wouldn't start with C if you wanted to go to C++.
> 
> I'm afraid I am broken. BASIC -> C -> Assembler.
> 
[snip]

> 
> I think that's a rather specialist field. I, for one, would like my 
> car's braking system to be designed by somebody who knows their
> subject  a heck of a lot deeper than any school course could teach.

It seems a bit strange that in vehiclesystems - say a failed capacitor -
could mean - no power - no power steering - and reduced braking.

I presume that Druck's light aircraft would have two separate systems
that could be manualy switched beween.


-- 
Colin Ferris Cornwall UK

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

#3060

On 20/12/2011 10:07, cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid wrote:
> I presume that Druck's light aircraft would have two separate systems
> that could be manualy switched beween.

The only fly-by wire my Cessna has, are the ones which attach the stick 
to the flappy bits, it pulls one wire for left, and the other for right!

---druck

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

#3061

In article <jcr58f$ca7$1@dont-email.me>,
   druck <news@druck.org.uk> wrote:
> On 20/12/2011 10:07, cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid wrote:
> > I presume that Druck's light aircraft would have two separate systems
> > that could be manualy switched beween.

> The only fly-by wire my Cessna has, are the ones which attach the stick 
> to the flappy bits, it pulls one wire for left, and the other for right!

I hope it has some uppy downy ones as well.

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________

Brian Jordan
Virtual RPC-AdjustSA
RISC OS 6.20
_____________________________________________________________________

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

#3064

On 21/12/2011 00:20, druck wrote:

> The only fly-by wire my Cessna has, are the ones which attach the stick
> to the flappy bits, it pulls one wire for left, and the other for right!

Having been (very briefly) in charge of an old Westland Lynx, even with 
gyro on you could feel the movement of the aircraft in the controls. I 
don't know how I'd feel about flying where there wasn't a fairly direct 
connection between the stick and the rotors. Ditto for a fixed wing.

[Of course, when the Real Pilot switched gyro off... Bloody! Hell! It's 
like trying to do a ballet with a ping-pong ball over a vacuum cleaner 
nozzle running in reverse. Can you say "delicate"? Actually, can you say 
"epic fail"? Pheeeeew!]


Best wishes,

Rick.

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

#3071

On 21/12/2011 07:16, Rick Murray wrote:
> On 21/12/2011 00:20, druck wrote:
>
>> The only fly-by wire my Cessna has, are the ones which attach the stick
>> to the flappy bits, it pulls one wire for left, and the other for right!
>
> Having been (very briefly) in charge of an old Westland Lynx, even with
> gyro on you could feel the movement of the aircraft in the controls. I
> don't know how I'd feel about flying where there wasn't a fairly direct
> connection between the stick and the rotors. Ditto for a fixed wing.

Well you only have to look at the Air France 447 crash (the Brazil to 
France flight lost in the Atlantic), that was a fly-by-wire aircraft 
(the A330 which I worked on - not flight systems though) with no force 
feed back between the two side sticks, so inputs on one aren't felt in 
the other.

Basically the crash happened because one of the two co-pilots attempting 
to fly the aircraft in a thunderstorm after the airspeed indicators had 
failed (thus disconnecting both the autopilot, and much of the computers 
flight laws preventing the aircraft being put in unsafe attitudes), was 
continually pulling back on the stick. This was not obvious to the other 
co-pilot or the captain when he returned to the flight deck, and by the 
time they realised what happened the aircraft had stalled, lost height 
and was non recoverable.

The accident report makes very chilling reading, and yet again raises 
questions about the ability of pilots to step in to position of flying 
an aircraft which is mechanically divorced from its flying control 
surfaces, in the extreme circumstance where the computers have abdicated 
their responsibility.

---druck

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

#3075

In article <jcsj1r$sqg$1@dont-email.me>, druck
<URL:mailto:news@druck.org.uk> wrote:
> On 21/12/2011 07:16, Rick Murray wrote:
> > On 21/12/2011 00:20, druck wrote:
> >
> >> The only fly-by wire my Cessna has, are the ones which attach the stick
> >> to the flappy bits, it pulls one wire for left, and the other for right!
> >
> > Having been (very briefly) in charge of an old Westland Lynx, even with
> > gyro on you could feel the movement of the aircraft in the controls. I
> > don't know how I'd feel about flying where there wasn't a fairly direct
> > connection between the stick and the rotors. Ditto for a fixed wing.
> 
> Well you only have to look at the Air France 447 crash (the Brazil to 
> France flight lost in the Atlantic), that was a fly-by-wire aircraft 
> (the A330 which I worked on - not flight systems though) with no force 
> feed back between the two side sticks, so inputs on one aren't felt in 
> the other.
> 
> Basically the crash happened because one of the two co-pilots attempting 
> to fly the aircraft in a thunderstorm after the airspeed indicators had 
> failed (thus disconnecting both the autopilot, and much of the computers 
> flight laws preventing the aircraft being put in unsafe attitudes), was 
> continually pulling back on the stick. This was not obvious to the other 
> co-pilot or the captain when he returned to the flight deck, and by the 
> time they realised what happened the aircraft had stalled, lost height 
> and was non recoverable.
> 
> The accident report makes very chilling reading, and yet again raises 
> questions about the ability of pilots to step in to position of flying 
> an aircraft which is mechanically divorced from its flying control 
> surfaces, in the extreme circumstance where the computers have abdicated 
> their responsibility.

I read a report on that report saying they pilots did not realise they were
diving and wondered what if they had a spirit level bolted in place would
they have believed it.

A spirit level can't crash!

Chris Evans

-- 
CJE Micro's / 4D                'RISC OS Specialists'
Telephone: 01903 523222             Fax: 01903 523679
chris@cjemicros.co.uk     http://www.cjemicros.co.uk/
78 Brighton Road, Worthing, West Sussex,     BN11 2EN
The most beautiful thing anyone can wear, is a smile!

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

#3084

In message <ant21170306cpErr@client.cjemicros.co.uk>
          Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> wrote:

> In article <jcsj1r$sqg$1@dont-email.me>, druck
> <URL:mailto:news@druck.org.uk> wrote:
> > On 21/12/2011 07:16, Rick Murray wrote:
> > > On 21/12/2011 00:20, druck wrote:
> > >
[snip]

> > 
> > Well you only have to look at the Air France 447 crash (the Brazil
> > to  France flight lost in the Atlantic), that was a fly-by-wire
> > aircraft  (the A330 which I worked on - not flight systems though)
> > with no force  feed back between the two side sticks, so inputs on
> > one aren't felt in  the other.
> > 
[snip]

> 
> I read a report on that report saying they pilots did not realise
> they were diving

They weren't diving - they had stalled - 6 Miles straight down like a
lift - landing flat on  their belly.

Three pilots/4Min  and they couldn't work out they had stalled.

Alarm - gave 70 plus 'Stall' warnings - perhaps it should have been in
French!

The transcript takes some reading - can't belive what I am reading :-((

(surprised that the cockpit conversations weren't compressed and sent
with the data over the sat link as standard)

(amazing that the black box was recovered from 2Miles down after 2
years)

-- 
Colin Ferris Cornwall UK

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

#3092

On 22/12/2011 11:36, cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid wrote:

> Three pilots/4Min  and they couldn't work out they had stalled.
[...]
> The transcript takes some reading - can't belive what I am reading :-((

Indeed. It seems surreal, like "come on, you can't make up a scenario 
*that* screwed up", but... um.


Best wishes,

Rick.

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

#3067

In message <jcr58f$ca7$1@dont-email.me>
          druck <news@druck.org.uk> wrote:

> On 20/12/2011 10:07, cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid wrote:
> > I presume that Druck's light aircraft would have two separate
> > systems that could be manualy switched beween.
> 
> The only fly-by wire my Cessna has, are the ones which attach the
> stick  to the flappy bits, it pulls one wire for left, and the other
> for right!

err - I was thinking more of the engine department
Two magneto's and carb? or Two electronic ignition/fuel injection
systems.

Cessna! - funny I tend to think of 'Druck' circling in a 'Red Tri-Plane'
:-)
 
Has anyone come across some block diagrams of 'engine control' software
- petrol/diesel?

-- 
Colin Ferris Cornwall UK

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

Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.acorn.misc

csiph-web