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

Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #164100 > unrolled thread

The football supporters' derisory chant?

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

Contents

  The football supporters' derisory chant? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-05-29 11:31 +0100
    Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-29 10:44 +0000
      Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-05-29 14:25 +0100
        Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-29 13:27 +0000
          Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-05-29 14:53 +0100
            Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-29 15:51 +0000
              Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-05-29 17:37 +0100
                Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-29 17:35 +0000
              Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-05-29 18:35 +0100
                Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-29 18:11 +0000
                  Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:10 -0500
                    Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 07:22 +0000
                      Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-05 09:13 +0100
                Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 20:34 +0200
                  Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? mausg@mail.com - 2016-05-30 14:47 +0000
                    Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-30 13:32 -0400
                Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:33 +0000
                  Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-05-31 14:51 -0400
                Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-31 20:32 +0000
            Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-30 11:36 -0700
              Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-30 19:51 +0000
                Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-30 22:57 +0000
                  Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-31 07:06 +0100
                    Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-05-31 07:13 +0000
                      Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-31 09:02 +0100
                        Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-31 08:37 +0000
                        Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-05-31 12:25 +0100
                          Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-31 14:06 +0100
              Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-30 16:01 -0400
                Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-31 07:44 +0100
                Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-06-03 00:09 -0400
                  Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 10:34 +0000
                    Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
                      Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 14:47 +0000
                        Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
                      Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:36 +0000
                        Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
              Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-05-30 23:21 +0100
          Re: The football supporters' derisory chant? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 11:50 -0400

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#164100 — The football supporters' derisory chant?

For aficionados of RTL/2, that is ...


"Oh! Oh! What a REF ARRAY!"

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#164101

On Sun, 29 May 2016 11:31:37 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:

> For aficionados of RTL/2, that is ...
> 
> 
> "Oh! Oh! What a REF ARRAY!"

And Algol 68....



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#164112

"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
news:dqvvgmFm19sU20@mid.individual.net...
> On Sun, 29 May 2016 11:31:37 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>
>> For aficionados of RTL/2, that is ...
>>
>>
>> "Oh! Oh! What a REF ARRAY!"
>
> And Algol 68....

Algol is one language of which I've no experience.

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

#164113

On Sun, 29 May 2016 14:25:45 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:

> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
> news:dqvvgmFm19sU20@mid.individual.net...
>> On Sun, 29 May 2016 11:31:37 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>
>>> For aficionados of RTL/2, that is ...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Oh! Oh! What a REF ARRAY!"
>>
>> And Algol 68....
> 
> Algol is one language of which I've no experience.

Most people (including me) are more familiar with Algol 60 if they know 
it at all. Algol 68 is definitely 'niche'.

-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#164115

"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
news:dr0920Fm19sU22@mid.individual.net...
> On Sun, 29 May 2016 14:25:45 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
>> news:dqvvgmFm19sU20@mid.individual.net...
>>> On Sun, 29 May 2016 11:31:37 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>> For aficionados of RTL/2, that is ...
>>>> "Oh! Oh! What a REF ARRAY!"
>>> And Algol 68....
>> Algol is one language of which I've no experience.
> Most people (including me) are more familiar with Algol 60 if they know
> it at all. Algol 68 is definitely 'niche'.

In my first year at Uni, Esex 1969, the computer science chaps learnt Algol
whereas we in the electronic engineering school did FORTRAN, but don't
remember whether is was IV or 68. 

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

#164120

On Sun, 29 May 2016 14:53:33 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:

> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
> news:dr0920Fm19sU22@mid.individual.net...
>> On Sun, 29 May 2016 14:25:45 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
>>> news:dqvvgmFm19sU20@mid.individual.net...
>>>> On Sun, 29 May 2016 11:31:37 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>>> For aficionados of RTL/2, that is ...
>>>>> "Oh! Oh! What a REF ARRAY!"
>>>> And Algol 68....
>>> Algol is one language of which I've no experience.
>> Most people (including me) are more familiar with Algol 60 if they know
>> it at all. Algol 68 is definitely 'niche'.
> 
> In my first year at Uni, Esex 1969, the computer science chaps learnt
> Algol whereas we in the electronic engineering school did FORTRAN, but
> don't remember whether is was IV or 68.

Unlikely to have been 68. I did my M.Sc. there in 1973-74 and we had to 
send the work off site for compilation and run (it was a course on 
comparative programming languages). That was Algol 68.



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#164121

"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
news:dr0hgqFm19sU23@mid.individual.net...
> On Sun, 29 May 2016 14:53:33 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>
>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
>> news:dr0920Fm19sU22@mid.individual.net...
>>> On Sun, 29 May 2016 14:25:45 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
>>>> news:dqvvgmFm19sU20@mid.individual.net...
>>>>> On Sun, 29 May 2016 11:31:37 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>>>> For aficionados of RTL/2, that is ...
>>>>>> "Oh! Oh! What a REF ARRAY!"
>>>>> And Algol 68....
>>>> Algol is one language of which I've no experience.
>>> Most people (including me) are more familiar with Algol 60 if they know
>>> it at all. Algol 68 is definitely 'niche'.
>>
>> In my first year at Uni, Esex 1969, the computer science chaps learnt
>> Algol whereas we in the electronic engineering school did FORTRAN, but
>> don't remember whether is was IV or 68.
>
> Unlikely to have been 68. I did my M.Sc. there in 1973-74 and we had to
> send the work off site for compilation and run (it was a course on
> comparative programming languages). That was Algol 68.
>

Oops! FORTRAN 66

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

#164123

On Sun, 29 May 2016 17:37:27 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:

> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
> news:dr0hgqFm19sU23@mid.individual.net...
>> On Sun, 29 May 2016 14:53:33 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>
>>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
>>> news:dr0920Fm19sU22@mid.individual.net...
>>>> On Sun, 29 May 2016 14:25:45 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
>>>>> news:dqvvgmFm19sU20@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>> On Sun, 29 May 2016 11:31:37 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>>>>> For aficionados of RTL/2, that is ...
>>>>>>> "Oh! Oh! What a REF ARRAY!"
>>>>>> And Algol 68....
>>>>> Algol is one language of which I've no experience.
>>>> Most people (including me) are more familiar with Algol 60 if they
>>>> know it at all. Algol 68 is definitely 'niche'.
>>>
>>> In my first year at Uni, Esex 1969, the computer science chaps learnt
>>> Algol whereas we in the electronic engineering school did FORTRAN, but
>>> don't remember whether is was IV or 68.
>>
>> Unlikely to have been 68. I did my M.Sc. there in 1973-74 and we had to
>> send the work off site for compilation and run (it was a course on
>> comparative programming languages). That was Algol 68.
>>
>>
> Oops! FORTRAN 66

Ah. ISWYM.



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#164122

"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
news:dr0hgqFm19sU23@mid.individual.net...
> .... I did my M.Sc. there in 1973-74

How much of what wasthought to be MSc material in 1974 is now common
knowledge amongst 14-year-olds?

Certainly in my early life you needed a degree to even be allowed to
touch a computer! (I was cutting my teeth after graduation on DEC
PDP8 and PDP11)

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

#164124

On Sun, 29 May 2016 18:35:22 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:

> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
> news:dr0hgqFm19sU23@mid.individual.net...
>> .... I did my M.Sc. there in 1973-74
> 
> How much of what wasthought to be MSc material in 1974 is now common
> knowledge amongst 14-year-olds?

I did some pretty advanced operating systems theory, compiler writing, 
theory of computation, the real details inside disk controllers, 
comparative programming languages, algorithms and data structures....

So, I'd say...not a lot.

The Essex course was good though. There was one alternative...I was 
offered a place at Imperial College.

I rejected them...the course was too easy.



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#164525

"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
news:dr0pm9Fm19sU25@mid.individual.net...
> On Sun, 29 May 2016 18:35:22 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>
>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
>> news:dr0hgqFm19sU23@mid.individual.net...
>>> .... I did my M.Sc. there in 1973-74
>>
>> How much of what wasthought to be MSc material in 1974 is now common
>> knowledge amongst 14-year-olds?
>
> I did some pretty advanced operating systems theory, compiler writing,
> theory of computation, the real details inside disk controllers,
> comparative programming languages, algorithms and data structures....
>
> So, I'd say...not a lot.
>
> The Essex course was good though. There was one alternative...I was
> offered a place at Imperial College.
>
> I rejected them...the course was too easy.
>

Now a hard disk in a PC has its own processor, quite a bit of cache memory, 
and algorithms to control what the disk drive system does.  For example, if 
you write out a block to disk, that block may wait for milliseconds in the 
cache... the processor wants to see if an additional block will be written 
to the file.  If another block is written, a similar wait may occur.  When 
the wait time expires, whatever blocks that were written to cache... are 
dumped to the actual disk.  A disk read may cause an entire track to be read 
into the cache, the thought being that another read from the track could be 
eminent.   My WD Green disk drive claims that after a certain time with *no* 
disk access, the disk heads will be "unloaded".

The preceding are sample things that a modern processor-controlled disk 
drive may do.  I'd sure like to understand *all* the algorithms used by the 
drive to make such decisions!!!

-- 

numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

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

#164534

On Sat, 04 Jun 2016 22:10:06 -0500, Charles Richmond wrote:

> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
> news:dr0pm9Fm19sU25@mid.individual.net...
>> On Sun, 29 May 2016 18:35:22 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>
>>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
>>> news:dr0hgqFm19sU23@mid.individual.net...
>>>> .... I did my M.Sc. there in 1973-74
>>>
>>> How much of what wasthought to be MSc material in 1974 is now common
>>> knowledge amongst 14-year-olds?
>>
>> I did some pretty advanced operating systems theory, compiler writing,
>> theory of computation, the real details inside disk controllers,
>> comparative programming languages, algorithms and data structures....
>>
>> So, I'd say...not a lot.
>>
>> The Essex course was good though. There was one alternative...I was
>> offered a place at Imperial College.
>>
>> I rejected them...the course was too easy.
>>
>>
> Now a hard disk in a PC has its own processor, quite a bit of cache
> memory, and algorithms to control what the disk drive system does.  For
> example, if you write out a block to disk, that block may wait for
> milliseconds in the cache... the processor wants to see if an additional
> block will be written to the file.  If another block is written, a
> similar wait may occur.  When the wait time expires, whatever blocks
> that were written to cache... are dumped to the actual disk.  A disk
> read may cause an entire track to be read into the cache, the thought
> being that another read from the track could be eminent.   My WD Green
> disk drive claims that after a certain time with *no*
> disk access, the disk heads will be "unloaded".
> 
> The preceding are sample things that a modern processor-controlled disk
> drive may do.  I'd sure like to understand *all* the algorithms used by
> the drive to make such decisions!!!

I doubt that anyone does! It sure screws up any attempt to optimise head 
movement.



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#164550

On 5 Jun 2016 07:22:21 GMT
Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:

> On Sat, 04 Jun 2016 22:10:06 -0500, Charles Richmond wrote:
> 
> > The preceding are sample things that a modern processor-controlled disk
> > drive may do.  I'd sure like to understand *all* the algorithms used by
> > the drive to make such decisions!!!
> 
> I doubt that anyone does! It sure screws up any attempt to optimise head 
> movement.

	That was screwed up long ago when the reported geometry became a
fiction and drives started internally remapping bad sectors instead of
allowing the OS to mark them as unusable. Optimising head movement can only
be done by the on disc processor and we just have to live with what it
does.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

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

#164125

In article <nif925$8vu$1@dont-email.me>,
gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
>news:dr0hgqFm19sU23@mid.individual.net...
>> .... I did my M.Sc. there in 1973-74
>
>How much of what wasthought to be MSc material in 1974 is now common
>knowledge amongst 14-year-olds?

Some. But there is a lot that is getting to be geek-only knowledge.
Like the existence of compilers. 

The generation that is now ~22 years old has had a lot shallower
exposure to computers, as "users only". They lag very much behind where
their 10 year older cousins were at their age.

>Certainly in my early life you needed a degree to even be allowed to
>touch a computer! (I was cutting my teeth after graduation on DEC
>PDP8 and PDP11)

I was able to get access as an undregrad. And could take evening
jobs with computer vendors that needed programming done.

-- mrr

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

#164133

On 2016-05-29, Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
> In article <nif925$8vu$1@dont-email.me>,
> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
>>news:dr0hgqFm19sU23@mid.individual.net...
>>> .... I did my M.Sc. there in 1973-74
>>
>>How much of what wasthought to be MSc material in 1974 is now common
>>knowledge amongst 14-year-olds?
>
> Some. But there is a lot that is getting to be geek-only knowledge.
> Like the existence of compilers. 
>
> The generation that is now ~22 years old has had a lot shallower
> exposure to computers, as "users only". They lag very much behind where
> their 10 year older cousins were at their age.
>
>>Certainly in my early life you needed a degree to even be allowed to
>>touch a computer! (I was cutting my teeth after graduation on DEC
>>PDP8 and PDP11)
>
> I was able to get access as an undregrad. And could take evening
> jobs with computer vendors that needed programming done.
>
> -- mrr
>

The early , almost `toy' computers, say the Spectrum, demanded knowledge,
and were fun. Years later, I was inclined to say "Hey!" as I realized 
that things were as described in the manual, pinouts, extra.


-- 
greymaus.eircom.ie
 .
  .
...

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

#164135

In article <slrnnkoh3o.19f.mausg@Smaus.org>, mausg@mail.com says...
> 
> On 2016-05-29, Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
> > In article <nif925$8vu$1@dont-email.me>,
> > gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
> >>"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
> >>news:dr0hgqFm19sU23@mid.individual.net...
> >>> .... I did my M.Sc. there in 1973-74
> >>
> >>How much of what wasthought to be MSc material in 1974 is now common
> >>knowledge amongst 14-year-olds?
> >
> > Some. But there is a lot that is getting to be geek-only knowledge.
> > Like the existence of compilers. 
> >
> > The generation that is now ~22 years old has had a lot shallower
> > exposure to computers, as "users only". They lag very much behind where
> > their 10 year older cousins were at their age.
> >
> >>Certainly in my early life you needed a degree to even be allowed to
> >>touch a computer! (I was cutting my teeth after graduation on DEC
> >>PDP8 and PDP11)
> >
> > I was able to get access as an undregrad. And could take evening
> > jobs with computer vendors that needed programming done.
> >
> > -- mrr
> >
> 
> The early , almost `toy' computers, say the Spectrum, demanded knowledge,
> and were fun. Years later, I was inclined to say "Hey!" as I realized 
> that things were as described in the manual, pinouts, extra.

For certain values of "early".   The 8008 shipped the same year as 
VM/370.  

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

#164173

On Sun, 29 May 2016 18:35:22 +0100, "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339"
<no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
>news:dr0hgqFm19sU23@mid.individual.net...
>> .... I did my M.Sc. there in 1973-74
>
>How much of what wasthought to be MSc material in 1974 is now common
>knowledge amongst 14-year-olds?
>
>Certainly in my early life you needed a degree to even be allowed to
>touch a computer! (I was cutting my teeth after graduation on DEC
>PDP8 and PDP11)

Kids can't use computers... and this is why it should worry you:

http://coding2learn.org/blog/2013/07/29/kids-cant-use-computers/

A good read that debunks the notion that kids know more about computers than
the teachers, or that using a computer a lot somehow translates into knowing
a lot about computers.

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

#164177

On 2016-05-31 1:33 PM, Questor wrote:
> On Sun, 29 May 2016 18:35:22 +0100, "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339"
> <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
>> news:dr0hgqFm19sU23@mid.individual.net...
>>> .... I did my M.Sc. there in 1973-74
>>
>> How much of what wasthought to be MSc material in 1974 is now common
>> knowledge amongst 14-year-olds?
>>
>> Certainly in my early life you needed a degree to even be allowed to
>> touch a computer! (I was cutting my teeth after graduation on DEC
>> PDP8 and PDP11)
>
> Kids can't use computers... and this is why it should worry you:
>
> http://coding2learn.org/blog/2013/07/29/kids-cant-use-computers/
>
> A good read that debunks the notion that kids know more about computers than
> the teachers, or that using a computer a lot somehow translates into knowing
> a lot about computers.
>
It is bi-modal.

Kids use computers a lot and some of them do it in such a way that the 
underlying technology is meaningless.

There is a different group of kids that impresses me quite a lot. They 
are using computers to achieve some goal. Unlike me when I was their age 
struggling for a way to optimize the number of processing cycles to get 
something useful done, they are focused on non traditional applications 
for computers, entertainment, communication and personal data 
management. All applications that were too expensive to even think about 
back then.

It is interesting that productivity tools are are informal languages 
suited to the application that we barely recognize as code. Cycle 
saving, why cycles are free.

Sit and listen to their explanations and remember the conversations we 
had with a generation before us.

w..

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

#164189

On Sun, 29 May 2016 18:35:22 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:

> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
> news:dr0hgqFm19sU23@mid.individual.net...
>> .... I did my M.Sc. there in 1973-74
> 
> How much of what wasthought to be MSc material in 1974 is now common
> knowledge amongst 14-year-olds?
> 
> Certainly in my early life you needed a degree to even be allowed to
> touch a computer! (I was cutting my teeth after graduation on DEC PDP8
> and PDP11)

I never got a chance at PDP-11 until I was a postgrad. I own four of them 
now!

And I always wanted a PDP-8. I have a working replica now.



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#164138

On Sunday, May 29, 2016 at 7:53:40 AM UTC-6, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:

> In my first year at Uni, Esex 1969, the computer science chaps learnt Algol
> whereas we in the electronic engineering school did FORTRAN, but don't
> remember whether is was IV or 68.

There was a FORTRAN IV, and a FORTRAN 77.

There was an Algol 59, an Algol 60, and an Algol 68.

I know of no language that had both a IV and a 68 to create this ambiguity.

Fortran 77, unlike Fortran IV, had structured IF - THEN - ELSE clauses.

Algol 68, unlike Algol 60, delimited certain structured clauses by using their 
keywords spelled backwards: if ... fi, case ... esac.

These are sufficiently striking features that they might jog your memory.

John Savard

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

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

csiph-web