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


Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #160827 > unrolled thread

Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY")

Started byQuadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
First post2016-03-10 15:55 -0800
Last post2016-03-18 14:28 -0600
Articles 20 on this page of 262 — 43 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-10 15:55 -0800
    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") The New Other Guy <Newsgnus@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 21:39 -0800
      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-11 06:32 +0000
        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-11 09:24 +0100
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-11 17:18 +0000
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-11 16:17 -0600
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-12 18:41 +0100
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-12 18:14 -0800
              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-03-12 20:39 -0600
                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-12 19:27 -0800
                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-13 09:04 -0600
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-13 12:58 -0500
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-14 12:25 -0700
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-14 14:45 -0700
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-14 18:12 -0500
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-15 17:30 +0000
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-15 17:31 -0700
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-15 17:28 -0700
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Jim Bank" <jb410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 13:29 +1100
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-15 22:45 -0500
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Jim Bank" <jb410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 16:29 +1100
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-16 09:27 +0000
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-16 14:33 +0100
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-16 09:47 -0500
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 20:02 -0400
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-15 09:57 +0100
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-14 11:58 -0700
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-03-14 19:07 +0000
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-14 20:24 +0000
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 19:59 -0400
      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 06:18 -0500
      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-03-11 06:24 -0500
        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-11 17:18 +0000
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-11 17:38 +0000
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-11 13:48 -0600
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 19:12 -0500
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-03-12 02:20 +0100
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-11 18:02 -0800
              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-12 03:09 -0500
                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-12 09:20 -0800
                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-12 15:53 -0500
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-12 16:27 -0800
              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-12 19:13 -0800
              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-12 22:30 -0500
                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-13 11:33 -0700
                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-13 13:46 -0600
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-13 17:41 -0400
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-13 18:13 -0600
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Sam Crean" <sg55443@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 11:29 +1100
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 08:51 +0000
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-13 22:00 -0400
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-14 00:20 -0600
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 08:54 +0000
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 07:12 -0400
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-14 12:31 -0700
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-14 23:50 +0100
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-14 12:29 -0700
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2016-03-14 20:13 +0000
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-15 17:30 +0000
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-15 18:36 +0000
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-03-15 17:53 -0300
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-15 19:55 -0400
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> - 2016-03-15 22:10 -0400
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-15 22:58 -0500
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-15 21:51 -0700
                                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") "Jim Bank" <jb410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 16:33 +1100
                                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-03-16 08:21 +0000
                                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") "Jim Bank" <jb410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 19:29 +1100
                                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-03-16 08:57 +0000
                                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-16 11:15 +0100
                                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-16 07:14 -0700
                                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-16 17:22 +0100
                                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") "Joe Morris" <j.c.morris@verizon.net> - 2016-03-16 20:05 -0400
                                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-17 08:02 +0100
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-16 06:51 -0700
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-03-16 02:18 -0300
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") "Jim Bank" <jb410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 16:34 +1100
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-16 13:05 +0000
                                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-16 06:51 -0700
                                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-16 16:16 +0000
                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-13 23:00 +0100
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-13 19:52 -0500
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-14 13:43 +0100
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-14 14:15 -0500
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-03-15 05:58 +0000
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-15 10:03 +0100
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-15 13:23 +0000
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-15 13:44 +0000
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-15 08:12 -0700
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-15 09:36 -0700
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-15 10:52 +0000
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-15 13:27 +0000
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-15 13:43 +0000
                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-14 12:27 -0700
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-14 19:52 +0000
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-15 00:37 +0100
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-15 13:14 +0000
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-14 12:53 -0700
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-14 16:23 -0500
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-14 17:17 -0700
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-03-14 20:03 -0500
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-14 19:31 -0700
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-14 22:15 -0700
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-15 09:43 +0100
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-15 16:11 -0500
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-15 14:56 -0700
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-15 17:18 -0500
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-15 15:49 -0700
                                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-15 16:07 -0700
                                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-16 09:44 -0700
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-15 17:22 -0700
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-15 18:12 -0700
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-03-16 11:52 -0500
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-03-16 11:42 -0500
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Sam Crean" <sg55443@gmail.com> - 2016-03-15 08:37 +1100
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-14 18:08 -0500
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-15 01:18 +0100
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 21:53 -0400
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-15 17:16 -0700
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-15 22:23 -0400
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Jim Bank" <jb410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 16:25 +1100
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-16 13:08 +0000
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-16 14:36 +0100
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-16 14:40 +0000
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-16 14:36 +0000
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-16 14:40 +0000
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Jim Bank" <jb410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 07:22 +1100
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-16 15:35 -0600
                                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") pechter@cobalt.pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2016-03-16 21:04 +0000
                                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 08:56 +1100
                                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-16 17:09 -0600
                                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 11:57 +1100
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Jim Bank" <jb410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 07:18 +1100
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Jim Bank" <jb410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 13:25 +1100
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-15 23:32 -0400
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-16 03:53 +0000
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-03-16 02:33 -0300
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-16 16:16 +0000
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-03-17 03:31 -0300
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase  "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-17 07:28 +0000
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-16 13:02 +0000
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 07:15 +1100
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-17 13:17 +0000
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-17 16:08 +0000
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-18 12:45 +0000
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 08:33 +1100
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reisrad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-14 23:18 +0100
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-15 16:23 -0500
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-15 17:39 -0500
                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-14 11:44 -0700
                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 19:55 -0400
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-15 17:35 -0700
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-15 18:30 -0700
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-03-16 12:14 -0500
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-16 11:24 -0700
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-03-16 12:08 -0500
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-16 10:46 -0700
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-03-16 20:36 -0500
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-16 19:16 -0700
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-11 16:37 -0800
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-12 18:59 -0800
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-13 12:10 +0000
              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-14 11:49 -0700
                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-14 20:15 +0000
                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-14 21:35 +0100
        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-11 13:43 -0600
      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-03-12 11:30 -0500
    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-11 12:04 -0800
      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-11 22:05 +0000
        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-12 13:34 +0000
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-03-12 18:07 +0000
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-13 14:12 +0000
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-03-14 19:47 +0000
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-15 13:43 +0000
              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-03-15 19:00 +0000
                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-16 13:02 +0000
                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 07:13 +1100
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-17 13:17 +0000
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-03-17 17:54 +0000
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-18 12:45 +0000
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 09:09 +1100
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-03-18 23:47 +0000
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-19 02:03 +0000
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-19 13:23 +0000
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-03-22 07:19 +0000
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-22 13:40 +0000
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 08:37 +1100
                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-03-17 17:55 +0000
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-18 12:45 +0000
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-03-18 23:48 +0000
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-19 13:23 +0000
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-03-22 07:19 +0000
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-22 13:40 +0000
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-03-26 07:31 +0000
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-26 13:24 +0000
                                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-04-15 08:33 +0000
                                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-04-15 12:18 +0000
    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-03-14 00:25 +0000
      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-13 18:00 -0700
        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-15 17:10 -0500
      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-03-14 13:30 -0400
        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-14 18:57 +0100
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-03-14 18:03 +0000
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-14 18:54 +0000
              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-14 13:09 -0700
                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-14 16:01 -0500
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-14 21:23 +0100
              Re: You count as an old-timer if Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-03-14 19:05 -0600
                Re: You count as an old-timer if Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-15 10:07 +0100
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-14 12:39 -0700
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-03-15 19:57 -0400
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-16 03:53 +0000
              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-03-21 20:28 -0400
                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-03-22 01:41 +0000
                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-03-22 07:26 +0000
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-22 07:18 -0600
                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") tracymnelson@gmail.com - 2016-03-22 09:39 -0700
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-03-22 23:12 -0500
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-03-23 11:19 +0000
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-23 05:00 -0700
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-23 12:09 +0000
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") tracymnelson@gmail.com - 2016-03-23 07:20 -0700
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-23 13:57 -0500
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-03-23 20:07 +0000
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-04-11 17:03 -0400
        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-14 16:59 -0500
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-03-14 17:57 -0500
      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-14 18:53 +0000
        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-14 12:49 -0700
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-14 19:55 -0400
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-15 07:13 -0700
              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-15 08:12 -0700
                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-15 12:11 -0400
                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-15 17:30 +0000
                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-15 14:44 -0400
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-15 19:36 +0000
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-15 17:25 -0700
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-15 18:12 -0700
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-03-16 08:01 +0000
                        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-15 23:17 -0400
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-16 03:53 +0000
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-16 11:17 -0400
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-16 16:16 +0000
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-16 14:34 -0400
                          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-16 13:01 +0000
                            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-16 11:26 -0400
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-16 16:03 +0000
                                Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-16 14:28 -0400
                                  Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-16 19:00 +0000
                                    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-03-16 21:18 +0000
                              Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-16 20:49 +0000
                      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-15 17:42 -0700
        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-14 21:40 +0100
    Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-16 21:09 -0500
      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-17 08:04 +0100
      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-17 13:17 +0000
        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 08:40 +1100
      Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-17 14:28 -0700
        Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-18 12:43 +0000
          Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-18 10:23 -0700
            Re: You count as an old-timer if (was Re: Origin of the phrase "XYZZY") scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-18 18:51 +0000
        Re: You count as an old-timer if Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-03-18 14:28 -0600

Page 10 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 14  Next page →


#161198

From"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-19 09:09 +1100
Message-ID<dl3ck9Fhkr3U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#161179

"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message 
news:PM00052E51FCB72C79@aca42417.ipt.aol.com...
> Questor wrote:
>> On 17 Mar 2016 13:17:30 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:PM00052E2A1E9F0CCD@aca43ce1.ipt.aol.com...
>>>>> Questor wrote:
>>>>>> On 15 Mar 2016 13:43:58 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>Questor wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 12 Mar 2016 13:34:04 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>When the game showed up on our development systems one Friday, a 
>>>>>>>>>bunch
>>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>>developers spent the entire weekend playing the game.  They could 
>>>>>>>>>not
>>>>>>>>>find the last point, so /CDO used the SET BREAK (address break
> command)
>>>>>>>>>to find it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please explain how this could be accomplished with SET BREAK alone. 
>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>> not think it is sufficient; you still need DDT.  DDT alone would be
>>>>> enough,
>>>>>>>but
>>>>>>>> SET BREAK might be helpful.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>You don't need DDT.  SET BREAK was a monitor command and could be
>>>>>>>issued at any time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You didn't answer my question.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know what the SET BREAK command is; I worked with TOPS-10 systems 
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> over ten years.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now read the commands manual for all the options.  I don't remember
>>>>> how /CDO did it.  I have a vague memory that the points were "counted"
>>>>> by setting a bit.  You can address break on a mask of a word.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To use the SET BREAK command, you need to know an address.  How do 
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> find what address to break on, without using DDT to look at the
>>>>>> executable?
>>>>>
>>>>> You can use FILDDT to look at any file.  You don't have to have DDT
> loaded
>>>>> with the EXE to look at the EXE.
>>>>>
>>>>>> (Okay, one could use the EXAMINE command, but that would be very
>>>>>> tedious.)
>>>>>> Furthermore, they were looking for the point that they DIDN'T get --
>>>>>> which
>>>>> means
>>>>>> they were looking for a routine that WASN'T executed -- so an address
>>>>>> break
>>>>>> there would never be hit.
>>>>>
>>>>> You can set a mask and break.  It wasn't a routine which wasn't 
>>>>> executed;
>>>>> it was a mask of a certain bit and a break when that bit was 
>>>>> referenced.
>>>>> Sheesh.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your soundbite of a story sounds good at first, but falls apart under 
>>>>>> a
>>>>> cursory
>>>>>> examination.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fine.  Don't believe the expert.
>>>>
>>>> You're no expert at finding the last point in a game like
>>>> that that the player can't find when playing the game.
>>>
>>>I know what happened and I know the capabilities the OS
>>>had and how these tools helped debug code and data.
>>
>> By your own admission, you don't know what happened.  The fact that
>> you know the capabilities of TOPS-10 utilities is immaterial.
>
> I don't know the precise command which was used.

There is no precise SET BREAK command that can be used to do that.

>>>> He's right, SET BREAK can't find that.
>>>
>>>Since it was done, it can be found.  SET BREAK works on any
>>>address no matter what its contents are.  You can break
>>>on data.
>>
>> SO FUCKING WHAT!!  You can't set an address break until you
>> know the address.  And you continue to ignore the key question --
>> how do you determine what address to break on?

> There are many, many ways to find that.  You can examine the code
> as a user or from the monitor.

But that doesn’t help you when it never uses that address.

> There is a bit for every point so that the program
> can "remember" which points had been scored;
> the program can't remember by keeping a
> simple accumulation of points made.

Doesn’t help you to find out how to get to the last point.

You can only do that be reading the code and seeing
what code transfers control to the code in the last point
and under what conditions of say points scored it will
allow the player to go there. SET BREAK doesn’t do that. 

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


#161207

Fromusenet@only.tnx (Questor)
Date2016-03-18 23:47 +0000
Message-ID<56ec937f.654481@nntp2.rawbw.com>
In reply to#161179
On 18 Mar 2016 12:45:55 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>Questor wrote:
>> By your own admission, you don't know what happened.  The fact that
>> you know the capabilities of TOPS-10 utilities is immaterial.

>I don't know the precise command which was used.

Admitting your ignorance is the first step on the road to knowledge.

>> SO FUCKING WHAT!!  You can't set an address break until you
>> know the address.  And you continue to ignore the key question --
>> how do you determine what address to break on?
>There are many, many ways to find that.  You can examine the code
>as a user or from the monitor.

In other words:  use DDT!  Which is what I've been saying all along.


>There is a bit for every point
>so that the program can "remember" which points had been scored;

Completely wrong.  There is no "bit for every point."

>the program can't remember by keeping a simple accumulation
>of points made.

Of course it can.  Here's the actual code:

============================================================
C  THE PRESENT SCORING ALGORITHM IS AS FOLLOWS:
C     OBJECTIVE:          POINTS:        PRESENT TOTAL POSSIBLE:
C  GETTING WELL INTO CAVE   25                    25
C  EACH TREASURE < CHEST    12                    60
C  TREASURE CHEST ITSELF    14                    14
C  EACH TREASURE > CHEST    16                   144
C  SURVIVING             (MAX-NUM)*10             30
C  NOT QUITTING              4                     4
C  REACHING "CLOSNG"        25                    25
C  "CLOSED": QUIT/KILLED    10
C            KLUTZED        25
C            WRONG WAY      30
C            SUCCESS        45                    45
C  CAME TO WITT'S END        1                     1
C  ROUND OUT THE TOTAL       2                     2
C                                       TOTAL:   350
C  (POINTS CAN ALSO BE DEDUCTED FOR USING HINTS.)

20000	SCORE=0
	MXSCOR=0

C  FIRST TALLY UP THE TREASURES.  MUST BE IN BUILDING AND NOT BROKEN.
C  GIVE THE POOR GUY 2 POINTS JUST FOR FINDING EACH TREASURE.

	DO 20010 I=50,MAXTRS
	IF(PTEXT(I).EQ.0)GOTO 20010
	K=12
	IF(I.EQ.CHEST)K=14
	IF(I.GT.CHEST)K=16
	IF(PROP(I).GE.0)SCORE=SCORE+2
	IF(PLACE(I).EQ.3.AND.PROP(I).EQ.0)SCORE=SCORE+K-2
	MXSCOR=MXSCOR+K
20010	CONTINUE

C  NOW LOOK AT HOW HE FINISHED AND HOW FAR HE GOT.  MAXDIE AND NUMDIE TELL US
C  HOW WELL HE SURVIVED.  GAVEUP SAYS WHETHER HE EXITED VIA QUIT.  DFLAG WILL
C  TELL US IF HE EVER GOT SUITABLY DEEP INTO THE CAVE.  CLOSNG STILL INDICATES
C  WHETHER HE REACHED THE ENDGAME.  AND IF HE GOT AS FAR AS "CAVE CLOSED"
C  (INDICATED BY "CLOSED"), THEN BONUS IS ZERO FOR MUNDANE EXITS OR 133, 134,
C  135 IF HE BLEW IT (SO TO SPEAK).

	SCORE=SCORE+(MAXDIE-NUMDIE)*10
	MXSCOR=MXSCOR+MAXDIE*10
	IF(.NOT.(SCORNG.OR.GAVEUP))SCORE=SCORE+4
	MXSCOR=MXSCOR+4
	IF(DFLAG.NE.0)SCORE=SCORE+25
	MXSCOR=MXSCOR+25
	IF(CLOSNG)SCORE=SCORE+25
	MXSCOR=MXSCOR+25
	IF(.NOT.CLOSED)GOTO 20020
	IF(BONUS.EQ.0)SCORE=SCORE+10
	IF(BONUS.EQ.135)SCORE=SCORE+25
	IF(BONUS.EQ.134)SCORE=SCORE+30
	IF(BONUS.EQ.133)SCORE=SCORE+45
20020	MXSCOR=MXSCOR+45

C  DID HE COME TO WITT'S END AS HE SHOULD?

	IF(PLACE(MAGZIN).EQ.108)SCORE=SCORE+1
	MXSCOR=MXSCOR+1

C  ROUND IT OFF.

	SCORE=SCORE+2
	MXSCOR=MXSCOR+2

C  DEDUCT POINTS FOR HINTS.  HINTS < 4 ARE SPECIAL; SEE DATABASE DESCRIPTION.

	DO 20030 I=1,HNTMAX
20030	IF(HINTED(I))SCORE=SCORE-HINTS(I,2)

C  RETURN TO SCORE COMMAND IF THAT'S WHERE WE CAME FROM.

	IF(SCORNG)GOTO 8241

C  THAT SHOULD BE GOOD ENOUGH.  LET'S TELL HIM ALL ABOUT IT.

	TYPE 20100,SCORE,MXSCOR,TURNS
20100	FORMAT(///' YOU SCORED',I4,' OUT OF A POSSIBLE',I4,
	1	', USING',I5,' TURNS.')
============================================================

Perhaps now is the time to shut the fuck up and admit you have no clue what
the hell you're talking about.

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


#161220

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2016-03-19 02:03 +0000
Message-ID<ncic1q01onm@news6.newsguy.com>
In reply to#161207
On 2016-03-18, Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:

> C  DID HE COME TO WITT'S END AS HE SHOULD?
>
> 	IF(PLACE(MAGZIN).EQ.108)SCORE=SCORE+1
> 	MXSCOR=MXSCOR+1

And that's why I needed to scan the source code to get that last point.
It's not enough to wind up at Witt's End - you have to bring the magazine
with you and drop it there.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored.  Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

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


#161226

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-03-19 13:23 +0000
Message-ID<PM00052E66A8F4F624@aca400ee.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#161207
Questor wrote:

> Perhaps now is the time to shut the fuck up and admit you have no clue what
> the hell you're talking about.
>
I'll shut up even though I do know what happened since you're not interested
about what happened in DEC's development history.

/BAH

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


#161315

Fromusenet@only.tnx (Questor)
Date2016-03-22 07:19 +0000
Message-ID<56f0f1d0.1557799@nntp2.rawbw.com>
In reply to#161226
On 19 Mar 2016 13:23:30 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>Questor wrote:
>> Perhaps now is the time to shut the fuck up and admit you have no clue what
>> the hell you're talking about.
>>
>I'll shut up even though I do know what happened since you're not interested
>about what happened in DEC's development history.

The real reason you're shutting up is because even when faced with irrefutable
evidence you can't admit you're wrong.  It's a character flaw you've exhibited
repeatedly.

And more hilarity!  Trying to make a connection to finding the last point in
ADVENT to DEC's development history.

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


#161337

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-03-22 13:40 +0000
Message-ID<PM00052EA320C39F9E@aca410ea.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#161315
Questor wrote:
> On 19 Mar 2016 13:23:30 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>Questor wrote:
>>> Perhaps now is the time to shut the fuck up and admit you have no clue
what
>>> the hell you're talking about.
>>>
>>I'll shut up even though I do know what happened since you're not interested
>>about what happened in DEC's development history.
>
> The real reason you're shutting up is because even when faced with
irrefutable
> evidence you can't admit you're wrong.  It's a character flaw you've
exhibited
> repeatedly.
>
> And more hilarity!  Trying to make a connection to finding the last point in
> ADVENT to DEC's development history.
>
It was a story about DEC PDP-10 monitor developers.  All development work
stopped on Friday of that weekend and didn't resume until the last point
was found Sunday.

/BAH

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


#161164

From"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-18 08:37 +1100
Message-ID<dl0mdfFr06rU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#161143

"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message 
news:PM00052E3E6355F0A6@aca2d627.ipt.aol.com...
> Rod Speed wrote:
>>
>>
>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:PM00052E2A1E9F0CCD@aca43ce1.ipt.aol.com...
>>> Questor wrote:
>>>> On 15 Mar 2016 13:43:58 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>Questor wrote:
>>>>>> On 12 Mar 2016 13:34:04 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>When the game showed up on our development systems one Friday, a 
>>>>>>>bunch
>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>developers spent the entire weekend playing the game.  They could not
>>>>>>>find the last point, so /CDO used the SET BREAK (address break 
>>>>>>>command)
>>>>>>>to find it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please explain how this could be accomplished with SET BREAK alone. 
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> do
>>>>>> not think it is sufficient; you still need DDT.  DDT alone would be
>>> enough,
>>>>>but
>>>>>> SET BREAK might be helpful.
>>>>>
>>>>>You don't need DDT.  SET BREAK was a monitor command and could be
>>>>>issued at any time.
>>>>
>>>> You didn't answer my question.
>>>>
>>>> I know what the SET BREAK command is; I worked with TOPS-10 systems for
>>>> over ten years.
>>>
>>> Now read the commands manual for all the options.  I don't remember
>>> how /CDO did it.  I have a vague memory that the points were "counted"
>>> by setting a bit.  You can address break on a mask of a word.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> To use the SET BREAK command, you need to know an address.  How do you
>>>> find what address to break on, without using DDT to look at the
>>>> executable?
>>>
>>> You can use FILDDT to look at any file.  You don't have to have DDT 
>>> loaded
>>> with the EXE to look at the EXE.
>>>
>>>> (Okay, one could use the EXAMINE command, but that would be very
>>>> tedious.)
>>>> Furthermore, they were looking for the point that they DIDN'T get --
>>>> which
>>> means
>>>> they were looking for a routine that WASN'T executed -- so an address
>>>> break
>>>> there would never be hit.
>>>
>>> You can set a mask and break.  It wasn't a routine which wasn't 
>>> executed;
>>> it was a mask of a certain bit and a break when that bit was referenced.
>>> Sheesh.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your soundbite of a story sounds good at first, but falls apart under a
>>> cursory
>>>> examination.
>>>
>>> Fine.  Don't believe the expert.
>>
>> You're no expert at finding the last point in a game like
>> that that the player can't find when playing the game.
>
> I know what happened and I know the capabilities the OS
> had and how these tools helped debug code and data.

But don’t have a fucking clue how you find the last point
in a game like that when the player playing the game
can't find it.

>> He's right, SET BREAK can't find that.
>
> Since it was done, it can be found.

BUT NOT BY USING SET BREAK which can't be used to find that.

> SET BREAK works on any address no matter
> what its contents are.  You can break on data.

But when the code never executes that or uses the data from
that, it is completely useless for finding the end point. That
has to be done by looking for the code that never does get
executed or the data that never gets used and checking the
code to see how to get there. SET BREAK can't do that.
 

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


#161160

Fromusenet@only.tnx (Questor)
Date2016-03-17 17:55 +0000
Message-ID<56eaef78.9863242@nntp2.rawbw.com>
In reply to#161072
On 16 Mar 2016 13:02:23 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>Questor wrote:
>> On 15 Mar 2016 13:43:58 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>Questor wrote:
>>>> On 12 Mar 2016 13:34:04 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>When the game showed up on our development systems one Friday, a bunch of
>>>>>developers spent the entire weekend playing the game.  They could not
>>>>>find the last point, so /CDO used the SET BREAK (address break command)
>>>>>to find it.
>>>>
>>>> Please explain how this could be accomplished with SET BREAK alone.  I do
>>>> not think it is sufficient; you still need DDT.  DDT alone would be
>enough,
>>>but
>>>> SET BREAK might be helpful.
>>>
>>>You don't need DDT.  SET BREAK was a monitor command and could be
>>>issued at any time.
>>
>> You didn't answer my question.
>>
>> I know what the SET BREAK command is; I worked with TOPS-10 systems for
>> over ten years.
>
>Now read the commands manual for all the options.  I don't remember
>how /CDO did it.  

No kidding.  Glad to see you finally admitting your ignorance for once.


>I have a vague memory that the points were "counted"
>by setting a bit.  You can address break on a mask of a word.

The players score is calculated with the SCORE variable using simple
arithmetic.


>> To use the SET BREAK command, you need to know an address.  How do you
>> find what address to break on, without using DDT to look at the executable?
>
>You can use FILDDT to look at any file.  You don't have to have DDT loaded
>with the EXE to look at the EXE.

Now you're just throwing crap at the wall and hoping something will stick.  Yes,
you can use FILDDT to look at the file -- so what?  It's much easier to use DDT
to solve this problem, particularly if the .EXE doesn't have symbols included.


>> (Okay, one could use the EXAMINE command, but that would be very tedious.)
>> Furthermore, they were looking for the point that they DIDN'T get -- which
>means
>> they were looking for a routine that WASN'T executed -- so an address break
>> there would never be hit.
>
>You can set a mask and break.  It wasn't a routine which wasn't executed;
>it was a mask of a certain bit and a break when that bit was referenced.
>Sheesh.

Wrong.  As per above, the player's score is calculated by simple arithmetic, not
bit-twiddling.


>> Your soundbite of a story sounds good at first, but falls apart under a
>cursory
>> examination.
>Fine.  Don't believe the expert.

That's hilarious -- the TOPS10 Release Engineer claiming to be an expert.
You keep that up and I'll call you out, expose you for the fraud you are.

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


#161178

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-03-18 12:45 +0000
Message-ID<PM00052E522410D21F@aca42417.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#161160
Questor wrote:
> On 16 Mar 2016 13:02:23 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>
> That's hilarious -- the TOPS10 Release Engineer claiming to be an expert.
> You keep that up and I'll call you out, expose you for the fraud you are.
>
Well, since I wasn't a release engineer, you might try to reexamine your
asssumptions.

/BAH

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


#161208

Fromusenet@only.tnx (Questor)
Date2016-03-18 23:48 +0000
Message-ID<56ec93a9.695790@nntp2.rawbw.com>
In reply to#161178
On 18 Mar 2016 12:45:53 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>Questor wrote:
>> On 16 Mar 2016 13:02:23 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>> That's hilarious -- the TOPS10 Release Engineer claiming to be an expert.
>> You keep that up and I'll call you out, expose you for the fraud you are.
>>
>Well, since I wasn't a release engineer, you might try to reexamine your
>asssumptions.

Yes, it would be more accurate to say you were the TOPS10 Release Technician,
although no doubt you had a "J" code -- which was an insult to the people who
actually were engineers.

(The "J" job code series at DEC was for software engineers.  J15 = junior
software engineer; J13 = software engineer; J11 = senior software engineer,
J09 = lead software engineer, etc.)

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


#161225

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-03-19 13:23 +0000
Message-ID<PM00052E669CB96072@aca400ee.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#161208
Questor wrote:
> On 18 Mar 2016 12:45:53 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>Questor wrote:
>>> On 16 Mar 2016 13:02:23 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>> That's hilarious -- the TOPS10 Release Engineer claiming to be an expert.
>>> You keep that up and I'll call you out, expose you for the fraud you are.
>>>
>>Well, since I wasn't a release engineer, you might try to reexamine your
>>asssumptions.
>
> Yes, it would be more accurate to say you were the TOPS10 Release
Technician,
> although no doubt you had a "J" code -- which was an insult to the people
who
> actually were engineers.
>
> (The "J" job code series at DEC was for software engineers.  J15 = junior
> software engineer; J13 = software engineer; J11 = senior software engineer,
> J09 = lead software engineer, etc.)
>
I had a J11.  Now please do reexamine your assumptions.

/BAH

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


#161316

Fromusenet@only.tnx (Questor)
Date2016-03-22 07:19 +0000
Message-ID<56f0f1ff.1604687@nntp2.rawbw.com>
In reply to#161225
On 19 Mar 2016 13:23:29 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>Questor wrote:
>> On 18 Mar 2016 12:45:53 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>Questor wrote:
>>>> On 16 Mar 2016 13:02:23 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> That's hilarious -- the TOPS10 Release Engineer claiming to be an expert.
>>>> You keep that up and I'll call you out, expose you for the fraud you are.
>>>>
>>>Well, since I wasn't a release engineer, you might try to reexamine your
>>>asssumptions.
>>
>> Yes, it would be more accurate to say you were the TOPS10 Release
>Technician,
>> although no doubt you had a "J" code -- which was an insult to the people
>who
>> actually were engineers.
>>
>> (The "J" job code series at DEC was for software engineers.  J15 = junior
>> software engineer; J13 = software engineer; J11 = senior software engineer,
>> J09 = lead software engineer, etc.)
>>
>I had a J11.  Now please do reexamine your assumptions.

Do you think you were the only one?  Because you certainly act like it.

Do you deny being the TOPS-10 release engineer?

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


#161333

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-03-22 13:40 +0000
Message-ID<PM00052EA31B80A220@aca410ea.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#161316
Questor wrote:
> On 19 Mar 2016 13:23:29 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>Questor wrote:
>>> On 18 Mar 2016 12:45:53 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>Questor wrote:
>>>>> On 16 Mar 2016 13:02:23 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>> That's hilarious -- the TOPS10 Release Engineer claiming to be an
expert.
>>>>> You keep that up and I'll call you out, expose you for the fraud you
are.
>>>>>
>>>>Well, since I wasn't a release engineer, you might try to reexamine your
>>>>asssumptions.
>>>
>>> Yes, it would be more accurate to say you were the TOPS10 Release
>>Technician,
>>> although no doubt you had a "J" code -- which was an insult to the people
>>who
>>> actually were engineers.
>>>
>>> (The "J" job code series at DEC was for software engineers.  J15 = junior
>>> software engineer; J13 = software engineer; J11 = senior software
engineer,
>>> J09 = lead software engineer, etc.)
>>>
>>I had a J11.  Now please do reexamine your assumptions.
>
> Do you think you were the only one?  Because you certainly act like it.
>
> Do you deny being the TOPS-10 release engineer?

I was never the RE.  You seem to be having a problem reexamining your
assumptions.

/BAH

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


#161490

Fromusenet@only.tnx (Questor)
Date2016-03-26 07:31 +0000
Message-ID<56f63aea.8451202@nntp2.rawbw.com>
In reply to#161333
On 22 Mar 2016 13:40:46 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>Questor wrote:
>> On 19 Mar 2016 13:23:29 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>Questor wrote:
>>>> On 18 Mar 2016 12:45:53 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>Questor wrote:
>>>>>> On 16 Mar 2016 13:02:23 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>> That's hilarious -- the TOPS10 Release Engineer claiming to be an
>expert.
>>>>>> You keep that up and I'll call you out, expose you for the fraud you
>are.
>>>>>>
>>>>>Well, since I wasn't a release engineer, you might try to reexamine your
>>>>>asssumptions.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, it would be more accurate to say you were the TOPS10 Release
>>>Technician,
>>>> although no doubt you had a "J" code -- which was an insult to the people
>>>who
>>>> actually were engineers.
>>>>
>>>> (The "J" job code series at DEC was for software engineers.  J15 = junior
>>>> software engineer; J13 = software engineer; J11 = senior software
>engineer,
>>>> J09 = lead software engineer, etc.)
>>>>
>>>I had a J11.  Now please do reexamine your assumptions.
>>
>> Do you think you were the only one?  Because you certainly act like it.
>>
>> Do you deny being the TOPS-10 release engineer?
>
>I was never the RE.

Then answer a simple question:  who was the TOPS-10 release engineer?

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


#161498

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-03-26 13:24 +0000
Message-ID<PM00052EF353FE4486@aca40d98.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#161490
Questor wrote:
> On 22 Mar 2016 13:40:46 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>Questor wrote:
>>> On 19 Mar 2016 13:23:29 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>Questor wrote:
>>>>> On 18 Mar 2016 12:45:53 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>Questor wrote:
>>>>>>> On 16 Mar 2016 13:02:23 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> That's hilarious -- the TOPS10 Release Engineer claiming to be an
>>expert.
>>>>>>> You keep that up and I'll call you out, expose you for the fraud you
>>are.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Well, since I wasn't a release engineer, you might try to reexamine your
>>>>>>asssumptions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it would be more accurate to say you were the TOPS10 Release
>>>>Technician,
>>>>> although no doubt you had a "J" code -- which was an insult to the
people
>>>>who
>>>>> actually were engineers.
>>>>>
>>>>> (The "J" job code series at DEC was for software engineers.  J15 =
junior
>>>>> software engineer; J13 = software engineer; J11 = senior software
>>engineer,
>>>>> J09 = lead software engineer, etc.)
>>>>>
>>>>I had a J11.  Now please do reexamine your assumptions.
>>>
>>> Do you think you were the only one?  Because you certainly act like it.
>>>
>>> Do you deny being the TOPS-10 release engineer?
>>
>>I was never the RE.
>
> Then answer a simple question:  who was the TOPS-10 release engineer?

What years are you talking about?  Release Engineering was a group
of its own.  I was in the TOPS-10 Monitor Development group.

/BAH

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


#162481

Fromusenet@only.tnx (Questor)
Date2016-04-15 08:33 +0000
Message-ID<5710a746.14073486@nntp2.rawbw.com>
In reply to#161498
On 26 Mar 2016 13:24:50 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>Questor wrote:
>> On 22 Mar 2016 13:40:46 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>Questor wrote:
>>>> On 19 Mar 2016 13:23:29 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>Questor wrote:
>>>>>> On 18 Mar 2016 12:45:53 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>Questor wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 16 Mar 2016 13:02:23 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> That's hilarious -- the TOPS10 Release Engineer claiming to be an
>>>expert.
>>>>>>>> You keep that up and I'll call you out, expose you for the fraud you
>>>are.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Well, since I wasn't a release engineer, you might try to reexamine your
>>>>>>>asssumptions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, it would be more accurate to say you were the TOPS10 Release
>>>>>Technician,
>>>>>> although no doubt you had a "J" code -- which was an insult to the
>people
>>>>>who
>>>>>> actually were engineers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (The "J" job code series at DEC was for software engineers.  J15 =
>junior
>>>>>> software engineer; J13 = software engineer; J11 = senior software
>>>engineer,
>>>>>> J09 = lead software engineer, etc.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>I had a J11.  Now please do reexamine your assumptions.
>>>>
>>>> Do you think you were the only one?  Because you certainly act like it.
>>>>
>>>> Do you deny being the TOPS-10 release engineer?
>>>
>>>I was never the RE.
>>
>> Then answer a simple question:  who was the TOPS-10 release engineer?
>
>What years are you talking about?  Release Engineering was a group
>of its own.  

I'm not talking about Release Engineering.  I'm talking about the TOPS-10
release engineer.

>I was in the TOPS-10 Monitor Development group.

But you didn't do any monitor development.

Simple question is still on the table:  who was the TOPS-10 release engineer?

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


#162486

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-04-15 12:18 +0000
Message-ID<PM00053084B40BA773@aca41163.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#162481
Questor wrote:
> On 26 Mar 2016 13:24:50 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>Questor wrote:
>>> On 22 Mar 2016 13:40:46 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>Questor wrote:
>>>>> On 19 Mar 2016 13:23:29 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>Questor wrote:
>>>>>>> On 18 Mar 2016 12:45:53 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>Questor wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 16 Mar 2016 13:02:23 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> That's hilarious -- the TOPS10 Release Engineer claiming to be an
>>>>expert.
>>>>>>>>> You keep that up and I'll call you out, expose you for the fraud you
>>>>are.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Well, since I wasn't a release engineer, you might try to reexamine
your
>>>>>>>>asssumptions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, it would be more accurate to say you were the TOPS10 Release
>>>>>>Technician,
>>>>>>> although no doubt you had a "J" code -- which was an insult to the
>>people
>>>>>>who
>>>>>>> actually were engineers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (The "J" job code series at DEC was for software engineers.  J15 =
>>junior
>>>>>>> software engineer; J13 = software engineer; J11 = senior software
>>>>engineer,
>>>>>>> J09 = lead software engineer, etc.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>I had a J11.  Now please do reexamine your assumptions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you think you were the only one?  Because you certainly act like it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you deny being the TOPS-10 release engineer?
>>>>
>>>>I was never the RE.
>>>
>>> Then answer a simple question:  who was the TOPS-10 release engineer?
>>
>>What years are you talking about?  Release Engineering was a group
>>of its own.
>
> I'm not talking about Release Engineering.  I'm talking about the TOPS-10
> release engineer.

Who was in the Release Engineering group.

>
>>I was in the TOPS-10 Monitor Development group.
>
> But you didn't do any monitor development.

I did more work on the CUSPs than the monitor.

>
> Simple question is still on the table:  who was the TOPS-10 release
engineer?

Which release and which software?



/BAH

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


#160936

Fromusenet@only.tnx (Questor)
Date2016-03-14 00:25 +0000
Message-ID<56e604f5.7631904@nntp2.rawbw.com>
In reply to#160827
I sometimes tell people that when I started in the industry, a high-end computer
terminal was one that could display both upper AND lower case characters.

More fun with whippersnappers:  show them a write ring, tell them it used to be
an essential piece of computing gear, and ask them what they think it is.

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


#160939

FromQuadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
Date2016-03-13 18:00 -0700
Message-ID<f776d228-16e0-45d6-8e9e-bd3b8a8b41d7@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#160936
On Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 6:25:00 PM UTC-6, Questor wrote:
> I sometimes tell people that when I started in the industry, a high-end computer
> terminal was one that could display both upper AND lower case characters.

What? Your terminal displayed letters in addition to numbers? Luxury!

> More fun with whippersnappers:  show them a write ring, tell them it used to be
> an essential piece of computing gear, and ask them what they think it is.

I wonder if anyone would have the insight to guess the right answer... "is it 
like those silver things we stuck on the notch on our floppy disks"?

John Savard

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


#161028

FromJon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu>
Date2016-03-15 17:10 -0500
Message-ID<OOOdne4MHaKpFXXLnZ2dnUU7-RGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#160939
Quadibloc wrote:

> On Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 6:25:00 PM UTC-6, Questor wrote:
>> I sometimes tell people that when I started in the industry, a high-end
>> computer terminal was one that could display both upper AND lower case
>> characters.
> 
> What? Your terminal displayed letters in addition to numbers? Luxury!
> 
>> More fun with whippersnappers:  show them a write ring, tell them it used
>> to be an essential piece of computing gear, and ask them what they think
>> it is.
> 
> I wonder if anyone would have the insight to guess the right answer... "is
> it like those silver things we stuck on the notch on our floppy disks"?

I think my kids would actually know that a 3.5" floppy was a data storage 
device, but I'm pretty sure that none but maybe the oldest would have ever 
used one.  I don't know if any of them would recognize a 5.25 or larger 
floppy, and I KNOW none of my brood has ever used one, or know about the 
write protect tabs on the true floppies.

Jon

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


Page 10 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 14  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers


csiph-web