Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #93793 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-10-16 03:26 +0000 |
| Last post | 2026-10-18 10:59 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 459 — 31 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 03:26 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 00:00 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 04:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Peyton" <peyton@solacium.us> - 2026-10-15 21:53 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 01:31 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 06:08 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 04:39 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 08:49 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 08:53 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 05:26 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:29 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:31 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:16 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 19:42 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:44 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:55 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:20 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 11:20 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 11:09 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 12:54 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:15 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 15:05 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 14:54 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 16:46 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 16:57 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 19:01 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:11 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 14:48 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Harold Stevens <wookie@bookworm.localdomain> - 2026-10-17 08:26 -0500
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 15:01 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 12:19 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 22:11 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 08:52 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 11:30 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 09:48 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:12 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 13:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 14:40 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:17 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 02:30 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:54 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 19:56 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:00 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 04:32 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:30 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:13 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 14:19 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:38 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 15:10 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:58 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 16:04 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 15:33 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 14:23 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:37 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 03:03 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:02 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 09:40 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-23 18:43 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:11 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:53 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 13:00 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 15:12 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 13:26 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 15:35 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 14:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 16:24 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:50 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 09:37 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:04 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 16:17 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-19 17:33 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 17:26 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 20:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 09:39 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 05:58 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:55 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:43 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 09:36 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:03 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 12:39 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-23 18:31 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-24 00:17 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 03:48 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 02:20 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 09:58 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 03:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 09:06 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 19:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-17 06:37 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 11:59 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:20 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:50 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:48 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 15:09 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 09:16 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-20 13:37 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 09:13 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:56 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-21 14:23 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:14 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 08:22 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-22 17:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 10:54 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:07 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 14:02 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 15:17 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 20:06 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 08:26 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-22 17:07 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 11:49 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 15:09 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 08:08 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-22 10:37 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 19:29 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 09:13 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 10:04 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 20:16 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-22 02:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:51 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:18 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 19:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:15 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-21 17:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:20 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 02:42 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:16 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 18:26 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 11:46 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 01:57 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 09:01 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 20:14 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 08:27 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-22 17:23 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-20 19:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:25 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:48 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 18:15 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 19:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:27 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-20 20:08 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 23:18 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 01:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:22 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 01:25 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 01:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-23 18:55 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-24 00:47 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:09 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:06 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 08:09 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-22 16:50 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 12:35 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-22 07:18 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-22 13:44 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:59 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 13:48 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-23 07:08 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-23 14:11 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-23 09:28 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-23 14:49 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:58 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:56 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-22 17:52 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 20:04 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:15 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:36 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 16:07 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 14:57 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Peyton" <peyton@solacium.us> - 2026-10-15 23:16 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 07:45 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Peyton" <peyton@solacium.us> - 2026-10-16 08:41 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 18:27 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 21:55 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 23:43 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:31 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 05:00 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 03:56 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:09 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:58 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 13:33 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:08 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 20:11 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:13 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-19 11:39 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-18 18:52 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 03:22 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-19 03:55 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:58 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 20:07 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:41 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 16:21 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 22:30 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 13:13 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:27 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 14:50 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 04:15 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 04:41 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 11:00 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:57 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:26 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:42 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 10:56 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 11:14 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 13:07 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:20 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 15:26 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:32 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:21 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 04:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:24 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:27 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:20 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 01:13 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 02:32 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 03:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:41 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 12:45 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 16:05 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 17:25 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 20:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:24 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:16 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:53 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 06:02 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Peyton" <peyton@solacium.us> - 2026-10-15 23:26 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 06:42 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 07:41 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 06:39 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 04:22 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 10:54 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:19 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 08:40 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:52 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:47 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-17 23:29 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Anton Antimo <anton@safunu.org> - 2026-10-19 17:18 -0300
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Helmut Waitzmann <nn.throttle@erine.email> - 2026-10-21 00:54 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-23 18:50 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-23 23:59 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-24 11:53 +0200
Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-10-24 12:10 +0000
Re: Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-24 18:53 +0200
Re: Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-26 00:28 -0400
Re: Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-26 06:20 +0100
Re: Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-26 03:38 -0400
Re: Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-27 05:01 +0100
Re: Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-27 12:24 -0400
[OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-28 01:12 +0100
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-28 05:26 -0400
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-28 19:33 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-29 00:19 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-29 12:27 -0400
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Josef Möllers <josef@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-28 17:01 +0100
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-28 17:50 +0100
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-28 18:18 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) David LaRue <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> - 2026-10-28 23:28 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-29 00:11 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-29 00:46 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-28 22:36 -0400
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-29 09:13 -0700
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-29 18:13 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de> - 2026-10-29 17:37 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-10-29 20:01 +0000
Re: Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-26 00:57 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-24 13:41 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-24 21:31 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-24 22:36 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-25 23:49 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-26 06:04 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-26 03:15 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-27 04:42 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-24 12:06 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-25 23:59 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-26 06:41 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-26 03:50 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-27 02:44 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-10-26 15:16 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-27 02:26 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 05:29 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 10:07 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:28 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 11:26 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 10:56 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 12:40 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 11:46 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 13:39 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:48 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:16 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 08:51 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 11:04 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 11:13 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 13:03 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:26 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 15:21 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 15:07 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 21:26 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-17 01:55 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-17 01:07 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:28 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:35 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:09 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-10-16 16:37 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:51 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 11:44 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 16:14 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-16 17:10 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 17:56 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-16 18:10 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 18:32 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 21:52 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 02:28 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-17 01:52 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 09:37 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:11 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 21:50 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 19:39 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 09:43 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 15:02 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 15:06 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:15 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 19:55 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:38 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:08 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 19:51 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 17:36 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:12 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:05 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 22:35 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 09:12 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 16:46 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 19:01 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 19:08 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:07 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 09:22 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:29 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 09:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:59 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:09 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:42 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 01:54 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 12:11 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 12:38 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 20:01 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 22:25 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 03:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 21:48 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-19 11:29 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 17:29 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 17:34 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-19 18:51 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 19:57 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-19 22:24 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 19:42 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:36 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-17 15:47 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 23:11 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-17 18:07 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 03:05 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 11:31 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:40 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 16:09 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:58 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 21:43 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 21:22 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-19 10:42 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 17:09 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-20 16:28 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 19:30 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-21 06:24 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 12:27 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 08:48 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 09:57 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 20:05 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 14:38 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:38 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 16:07 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Piergiorgio Sartor <piergiorgio.sartor.this.should.not.be.used@nexgo.REMOVETHIS.de> - 2026-10-18 23:44 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 22:09 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Piergiorgio Sartor <piergiorgio.sartor.this.should.not.be.used@nexgo.REMOVETHIS.de> - 2026-10-19 09:54 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 08:40 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Piergiorgio Sartor <piergiorgio.sartor.this.should.not.be.used@nexgo.REMOVETHIS.de> - 2026-10-19 10:55 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-20 00:54 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Piergiorgio Sartor <piergiorgio.sartor.this.should.not.be.used@nexgo.REMOVETHIS.de> - 2026-10-20 08:08 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-20 07:50 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-20 18:06 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 02:59 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-19 07:16 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:33 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 02:52 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 19:47 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:36 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-19 00:22 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 02:49 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 12:14 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-17 07:20 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 07:43 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-17 12:17 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:18 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 08:16 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:18 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 04:47 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-17 17:26 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 19:47 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 07:25 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:45 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:26 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:50 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:51 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 04:58 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 07:43 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:15 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 22:03 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 09:01 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 07:13 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:17 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 21:31 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:14 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 08:01 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 05:55 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:09 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 19:28 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-19 08:01 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 20:05 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 09:16 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:12 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 02:42 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 08:53 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 05:06 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:32 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:20 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:22 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-19 08:20 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 19:36 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 19:35 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:18 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-17 06:32 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 11:55 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 12:12 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 13:43 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:37 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 09:07 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-17 13:30 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 13:09 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:08 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:04 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nick Charles <none@none.none> - 2026-10-16 23:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 02:29 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-17 01:54 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 08:58 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 11:25 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "De ongekruisigde ds." <ongekruisigde-ds@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 10:59 +0000
Page 13 of 23 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 … 23 Next page →
| From | Helmut Waitzmann <nn.throttle@erine.email> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 00:54 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <83se20c7ao.fsf@helmutwaitzmann.news.arcor.de> |
| In reply to | #94089 |
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com>:
> On 2026-10-17 22:47, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> I've just done this ("a script change while it's running") [*]
>
> [*] What I've done was to run the following script "dynchg.sh"
>
> while read ; do
> echo $REPLY
> done
>
> and change it (from another terminal) while it runs by
>
> sed -i '2p' dynchg.sh
>
As the "-i" option is not defined by the POSIX standard but by GNU
sed, I assume that your example uses GNU sed.
GNU sed's "-i" option does not edit the file in place. Rather it
sends its output to a new file (instead of to standard output),
then removes (or renames) the name of the original file.
Finally, the name of the new file is renamed to be the no more
existing name of the original file.
=> GNU sed doesn't modify the original shell script, which has
been opened by the shell.
Therefore the shell won't see anything of the new file but rather
stick to the already opened original file (even, if that original
file hasn't got any file name).
> I could even remove that file from the directory and it still
> processes data as expected.
>
Yes. As long as the shell doesn't close the file descriptor
accessing the original file, it will continue to access the
original unmodified file.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-23 18:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <11bg381$1bjd2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94433 |
On 2026-10-21 00:54, Helmut Waitzmann wrote:
> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com>:
>> On 2026-10-17 22:47, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>> I've just done this ("a script change while it's running") [*]
>>
>> [*] What I've done was to run the following script "dynchg.sh"
>>
>> while read ; do
>> echo $REPLY
>> done
>>
>> and change it (from another terminal) while it runs by
>>
>> sed -i '2p' dynchg.sh
>>
>
> As the "-i" option is not defined by the POSIX standard but by GNU sed,
> I assume that your example uses GNU sed.
Yes. (I've just used '-i' for simplicity.)
A better example would have been to issue (from another shell window)
the command
echo "echo END" >> dynchg.sh
and we then see that after terminating the above loop the "END" will
be printed.
(I'm testing with ksh but suppose that in bash it would be similar.)
Janis
> [...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-23 23:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <RH-dnS_Dp6SSsEH3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94620 |
On 10/23/26 12:50, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> On 2026-10-21 00:54, Helmut Waitzmann wrote:
>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com>:
>>> On 2026-10-17 22:47, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>> I've just done this ("a script change while it's running") [*]
>>>
>>> [*] What I've done was to run the following script "dynchg.sh"
>>>
>>> while read ; do
>>> echo $REPLY
>>> done
>>>
>>> and change it (from another terminal) while it runs by
>>>
>>> sed -i '2p' dynchg.sh
>>>
>>
>> As the "-i" option is not defined by the POSIX standard but by GNU
>> sed, I assume that your example uses GNU sed.
>
> Yes. (I've just used '-i' for simplicity.)
>
> A better example would have been to issue (from another shell window)
> the command
>
> echo "echo END" >> dynchg.sh
>
> and we then see that after terminating the above loop the "END" will
> be printed.
>
> (I'm testing with ksh but suppose that in bash it would be similar.)
KSH and BASH are "mostly compatible". Minor diffs but
nothing hard to get around. Anything you can do in KSH
can be done in BASH.
There are MANY shells, of course. CSH and ZSH are 'more
different' for example and it'd be a more complicated
translation. Not impossible, just more work.
If KSH works for you then stick with it. Note however
that MOST distros default to BASH now - so if you plan
to 'distribute' your work it'd be better to move your
stuff over to BASH. Most distros, users would have to
intentionally install KSH and scripts would need a
shebang at the top to specify which shell to use.
(good practice, always add the shebang)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-24 11:53 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <11bhv61$1bjd2$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94632 |
On 2026-10-24 05:59, c186282 wrote: > > KSH and BASH are "mostly compatible". Minor diffs but > nothing hard to get around. Anything you can do in KSH > can be done in BASH. This is not correct. While Bash has over time adopted quite some features from Ksh - but sadly needed often far too many years for that - there's still a lot substantial functions in Ksh that Bash has not implemented (or substituted by some equivalent feature). > [...] > > If KSH works for you then stick with it. I use Ksh meanwhile for ~35 years, and since I use a lot of Ksh features that Bash just doesn't support there's certainly no reason to switch. (Also its speed is a criterion, BTW. And back then there were no Bash versions on commercial Unixes; but commercial Linuxes haven't the prevalence any more today, and play no role now in my private systems context.) > Note however that MOST distros default to BASH now - Yes, Linux often has Bash as its default. > so if you plan > to 'distribute' your work it'd be better to move your > stuff over to BASH. Certainly not. And this is short-sighted. If _portability_ is an issue you'd better stick with the POSIX subset of both, Ksh and Bash. (Sadly, as we observe, especially "Linux kiddies" often don't know what that POSIX subset actually is; in their scripts they are writing #!/bin/sh and using some bash-specific syntax not realizing that there's a difference, and that Bash is not the [portable] *standard*.) > Most distros, users would have to > intentionally install KSH and scripts would need a > shebang at the top to specify which shell to use. I don't recall to have ever "intentionally installed" Ksh on Linux. Earlier Linuxes had just a (sub-optimal!) PD-ksh that you could use out of the box. Later they provided also the much better "original" [AT&T] Ksh, and meanwhile you find on (some?) Linuxes ksh93u+m, Martijn Dekker's improved version. Of course you can call shell scripts with the executable-flag set and with a she-bang line on top. Personally I run most shell scripts with the interpreter explicitly provided, as in ksh my-script flags arguments allowing easy debugging by adding '-x' without explicit 'set' command in the script. Only if some script gets the status of a "standard-command" I regularly use I set the shebang. YMMV. (So you don't "need" a shebang line, but it's useful.) > (good practice, always add the shebang) Yes, if you are running your scripts executable script (or if you want to give your editor a hint for syntax highlighting, what shell is actually used, or just for specification purpose; but note, as said above, that we see many people have no clear idea about what a "/bin/sh" is and where /bin/bash or /bin/ksh differ from the standard. Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-24 12:10 +0000 |
| Subject | Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) |
| Message-ID | <11bi77v$20c1p$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #94648 |
In article <11bhv61$1bjd2$2@dont-email.me>, Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >On 2026-10-24 05:59, c186282 wrote: >> >> KSH and BASH are "mostly compatible". Minor diffs but >> nothing hard to get around. Anything you can do in KSH >> can be done in BASH. > >This is not correct. While Bash has over time adopted quite >some features from Ksh - but sadly needed often far too many >years for that - there's still a lot substantial functions >in Ksh that Bash has not implemented (or substituted by some >equivalent feature). I think you're taking Speedy way too seriously here. All of your points are valid, of course, but it should not be necessary to respond to the troll. BTW, you assert that there are (many) features of Ksh that are not (yet) present in bash. I'm not doubting you, but I am curious about examples. It seems to me that if you assert something like that, you should give examples. -- Rich people pay Fox people to convince middle class people to blame poor people. (John Fugelsang)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-24 18:53 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) |
| Message-ID | <11binqk$1bjd2$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94654 |
On 2026-10-24 14:10, Kenny McCormack wrote: > In article <11bhv61$1bjd2$2@dont-email.me>, > Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >> On 2026-10-24 05:59, c186282 wrote: >>> >>> KSH and BASH are "mostly compatible". Minor diffs but >>> nothing hard to get around. Anything you can do in KSH >>> can be done in BASH. >> >> This is not correct. While Bash has over time adopted quite >> some features from Ksh - but sadly needed often far too many >> years for that - there's still a lot substantial functions >> in Ksh that Bash has not implemented (or substituted by some >> equivalent feature). > > I think you're taking Speedy way too seriously here. All of your points > are valid, of course, but it should not be necessary to respond to the > troll. Oh, I didn't knew that he's considered a troll. His post looked just uninformed, or opinionated, not trollish. > > BTW, you assert that there are (many) features of Ksh that are not (yet) > present in bash. I'm not doubting you, but I am curious about examples. > It seems to me that if you assert something like that, you should give > examples. Mind that his post says "Minor diffs"; and I was not (not primarily) addressing the absolute number of features but those features that are hard(er) or in practice impossible [based on existing functions] to substitute. Off the top of my head I had been thinking of discipline functions, or the "type system" - these are very closely embedded in the shell. Note that while these features are probably not widely used there's also many often used details I used, functions and options, that Bash doesn't have as I noticed over the time. I've occasionally mentioned those in some posts that where about such functionality, but I'm too lazy to create a list or something, which would require to re-test every features whether one or another has meanwhile been implemented; that would be too much effort.[*]) Janis [*] After finishing writing the post I remembered that we could ask a search machine AI, but strangely it had no or found any substantial information, not even the obvious examples; so we have to rely on the experts or own experience here.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-26 00:28 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) |
| Message-ID | <pLicnUOiRttbS0P3nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94658 |
On 10/24/26 12:53, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > On 2026-10-24 14:10, Kenny McCormack wrote: >> In article <11bhv61$1bjd2$2@dont-email.me>, >> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> On 2026-10-24 05:59, c186282 wrote: >>>> >>>> KSH and BASH are "mostly compatible". Minor diffs but >>>> nothing hard to get around. Anything you can do in KSH >>>> can be done in BASH. >>> >>> This is not correct. While Bash has over time adopted quite >>> some features from Ksh - but sadly needed often far too many >>> years for that - there's still a lot substantial functions >>> in Ksh that Bash has not implemented (or substituted by some >>> equivalent feature). >> >> I think you're taking Speedy way too seriously here. All of your points >> are valid, of course, but it should not be necessary to respond to the >> troll. > > Oh, I didn't knew that he's considered a troll. His post looked just > uninformed, or opinionated, not trollish. Thanks, I think :-) I never 'troll' - just relate MY experiences and what I've learned from them. I had my own path, own needs, my own 'environments', starting in the punch-card days. But what served ME best may not be what served YOU, what I learned may not be what YOU learned. A great purpose of groups like these is to bring in a LOT of experiences and perspectives. You MAY find something compatible/useful in all the diverse advice. I don't pretend to know-it-all, nothing close (though a few, well, SAY they do :-) As said elsewhere, "NEED" eventually supersedes all else. Earlier on, all the shells maybe started with a narrow 'vision' but HAD to include capabilities the other people put in. Sometimes the additions were neat/clear, sometimes not so much, but they're THERE. A sort of 'functional convergence' due to NEEDS. Anyway, I reject 'religions' built around shells or langs and such. For each need, pick the best tools and approaches. "Best" - sometimes that's what most harmonizes with YOUR brand of thinking. >> BTW, you assert that there are (many) features of Ksh that are not (yet) >> present in bash. I'm not doubting you, but I am curious about examples. >> It seems to me that if you assert something like that, you should give >> examples. > > Mind that his post says "Minor diffs"; and I was not (not primarily) > addressing the absolute number of features but those features that > are hard(er) or in practice impossible [based on existing functions] > to substitute. Off the top of my head I had been thinking of discipline > functions, or the "type system" - these are very closely embedded in > the shell. > > Note that while these features are probably not widely used there's > also many often used details I used, functions and options, that Bash > doesn't have as I noticed over the time. I've occasionally mentioned > those in some posts that where about such functionality, but I'm too > lazy to create a list or something, which would require to re-test > every features whether one or another has meanwhile been implemented; > that would be too much effort.[*]) > > Janis > > [*] After finishing writing the post I remembered that we could ask > a search machine AI, but strangely it had no or found any substantial > information, not even the obvious examples; so we have to rely on the > experts or own experience here. "AI"s aren't really as all-around 'smart' as their sellers suggest :-) You generally find that out AFTER you $ubscribe .....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-26 06:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) |
| Message-ID | <11bmnvg$36mvk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94683 |
On 2026-10-26 05:28, c186282 wrote: > On 10/24/26 12:53, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >> On 2026-10-24 14:10, Kenny McCormack wrote: >>> In article <11bhv61$1bjd2$2@dont-email.me>, >>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 2026-10-24 05:59, c186282 wrote: >>>>> >>>>> KSH and BASH are "mostly compatible". Minor diffs but >>>>> nothing hard to get around. Anything you can do in KSH >>>>> can be done in BASH. >>>> >>>> This is not correct. While Bash has over time adopted quite >>>> some features from Ksh - but sadly needed often far too many >>>> years for that - there's still a lot substantial functions >>>> in Ksh that Bash has not implemented (or substituted by some >>>> equivalent feature). >>> >>> I think you're taking Speedy way too seriously here. All of your points >>> are valid, of course, but it should not be necessary to respond to the >>> troll. >> >> Oh, I didn't knew that he's considered a troll. His post looked just >> uninformed, or opinionated, not trollish. > > Thanks, I think :-) > > I never 'troll' - just relate MY experiences and what > I've learned from them. I had my own path, own needs, > my own 'environments', starting in the punch-card days. (I've still a block of punch-cards in the cellar, so I've got an impression where you're coming from.) > But what served ME best may not be what served YOU, what > I learned may not be what YOU learned. Oh, in my previous reply I said something like that; that it's fine if it serves you in your private contexts. A discrepancy might appear when you are working in a larger area with rules that are not tailored to your personal likings but to experiences from a larger (or another) group of persons. > > A great purpose of groups like these is to bring in > a LOT of experiences and perspectives. You MAY find > something compatible/useful in all the diverse advice. > I don't pretend to know-it-all, nothing close (though > a few, well, SAY they do :-) Oh, I'm completely fine with that. - If statements are formulated as opinions, what else can we do than agree to those or disagree. A problem, though, is, when opinions are stated as facts, and if statements are even wrong, then they should be corrected. (Or clarified if it was just a communication or expression problem.) > > As said elsewhere, "NEED" eventually supersedes all else. > Earlier on, all the shells maybe started with a narrow > 'vision' but HAD to include capabilities the other people > put in. Sometimes the additions were neat/clear, sometimes > not so much, but they're THERE. > > A sort of 'functional convergence' due to NEEDS. > > Anyway, I reject 'religions' built around shells or > langs and such. For each need, pick the best tools > and approaches. "Best" - sometimes that's what most > harmonizes with YOUR brand of thinking. (Unfortunately language topics are often presented with religious fervor.) Janis > [...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-26 03:38 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) |
| Message-ID | <pLicnX-iRtvwnkL3nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94689 |
On 10/26/26 01:20, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > On 2026-10-26 05:28, c186282 wrote: >> On 10/24/26 12:53, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >>> On 2026-10-24 14:10, Kenny McCormack wrote: >>>> In article <11bhv61$1bjd2$2@dont-email.me>, >>>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 2026-10-24 05:59, c186282 wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> KSH and BASH are "mostly compatible". Minor diffs but >>>>>> nothing hard to get around. Anything you can do in KSH >>>>>> can be done in BASH. >>>>> >>>>> This is not correct. While Bash has over time adopted quite >>>>> some features from Ksh - but sadly needed often far too many >>>>> years for that - there's still a lot substantial functions >>>>> in Ksh that Bash has not implemented (or substituted by some >>>>> equivalent feature). >>>> >>>> I think you're taking Speedy way too seriously here. All of your >>>> points >>>> are valid, of course, but it should not be necessary to respond to the >>>> troll. >>> >>> Oh, I didn't knew that he's considered a troll. His post looked just >>> uninformed, or opinionated, not trollish. >> >> Thanks, I think :-) >> >> I never 'troll' - just relate MY experiences and what >> I've learned from them. I had my own path, own needs, >> my own 'environments', starting in the punch-card days. > > (I've still a block of punch-cards in the cellar, so I've got an > impression where you're coming from.) > >> But what served ME best may not be what served YOU, what >> I learned may not be what YOU learned. My first computer was a PDP-11. Great unit. But still remember having to submit my card stack (DON'T drop it !) to the IT overlords. Helped a bit if you offered them 'gifts'. > Oh, in my previous reply I said something like that; that it's > fine if it serves you in your private contexts. Most everybody has a 'private context'. Doesn't matter what you do in 'IT'. Every life experience and need is a bit different, takes you down different paths. Since the 70s the field was SO wide that nobody could do it ALL, keep it ALL in mind. DID like that newfangled 'C' language for the PDPs though :-) > A discrepancy might appear when you are working in a larger area > with rules that are not tailored to your personal likings but to > experiences from a larger (or another) group of persons. Been there. >> A great purpose of groups like these is to bring in >> a LOT of experiences and perspectives. You MAY find >> something compatible/useful in all the diverse advice. >> I don't pretend to know-it-all, nothing close (though >> a few, well, SAY they do :-) > > Oh, I'm completely fine with that. - If statements are formulated > as opinions, what else can we do than agree to those or disagree. > A problem, though, is, when opinions are stated as facts, and if > statements are even wrong, then they should be corrected. (Or > clarified if it was just a communication or expression problem.) Still a lot of 'religion' involved ... some present THE Way ... holy writ. Rarely works for most. Yea, there are maybe a few IQ-200 people who post. Well, good for them. we need some IQ-200 people. However even they have their prejudices and preferences that may not serve all. It's the tendency for ATTITUDE that most annoys me. Not looking for an Ayatollah. Ever see that "Sheldon" character from the TV series ? HIS way or you get the "retard" label :-) >> As said elsewhere, "NEED" eventually supersedes all else. >> Earlier on, all the shells maybe started with a narrow >> 'vision' but HAD to include capabilities the other people >> put in. Sometimes the additions were neat/clear, sometimes >> not so much, but they're THERE. >> >> A sort of 'functional convergence' due to NEEDS. >> >> Anyway, I reject 'religions' built around shells or >> langs and such. For each need, pick the best tools >> and approaches. "Best" - sometimes that's what most >> harmonizes with YOUR brand of thinking. > > (Unfortunately language topics are often presented with religious > fervor.) Very much noted. But, bigger picture, I think that's *wrong*. MANY paths to "your solution". Pick the best and most compatible. SO many paths to be had these days. Be smart and sensible. Simpler TENDS to be better long-term.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-27 05:01 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) |
| Message-ID | <11bp7nd$139t9$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94692 |
On 2026-10-26 08:38, c186282 wrote: [...] > My first computer was a PDP-11. Great unit. > But still remember having to submit my card > stack (DON'T drop it !) to the IT overlords. Corrupted data (if you've dropped it)... > Helped a bit if you offered them 'gifts'. ...and corrupted people? Janis PS: The nastiest thing I've encountered with the card deck was that a friend exchanged all my cards which carried the word 'BEGIN' with cards carrying the word 'SADAT' - just as a hilarious play with words WRT two international politicians back then. Not so funny for me when I noticed all the syntax errors and had to wait another hour for the next batch run.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-27 12:24 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Taking Speedy too seriously (Was: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI) |
| Message-ID | <1omdnboFafC6TX33nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94715 |
On 10/27/26 00:01, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > On 2026-10-26 08:38, c186282 wrote: > [...] >> My first computer was a PDP-11. Great unit. >> But still remember having to submit my card >> stack (DON'T drop it !) to the IT overlords. > > Corrupted data (if you've dropped it)... Well, a lot of re-sorting at the very least. Punch cards and paper tape WORKED. Clunky and low-density but they worked - and were used for quite awhile. However putting a COBOL corporate accounting system on cards is not an attractive prospect. I've run into people who remember those mag tape towers from old movies and think the programs/data was just magically uploaded directly to them. Nope, paper cards first ..... Found a PDP-11 emulator for Linux, but it just wouldn't be quite the same. MAY be some actual working units still out there however. Weak unit by today's standards, but at the time it was pretty good. >> Helped a bit if you offered them 'gifts'. > > ...and corrupted people? People are mostly pre-corrupted :-) The SysLord had a serial terminal, but all the rest of us had to do cards. > Janis > > PS: The nastiest thing I've encountered with the > card deck was that a friend exchanged all my cards > which carried the word 'BEGIN' with cards carrying > the word 'SADAT' - just as a hilarious play with > words WRT two international politicians back then. > Not so funny for me when I noticed all the syntax > errors and had to wait another hour for the next > batch run. Admit it, was a CLEVER joke ! SADAT ... do, but barely, remember it now. The dictator, well, things didn't work out so well for him :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-28 01:12 +0100 |
| Subject | [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <11brekh$139ta$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94725 |
On 2026-10-27 17:24, c186282 wrote: > On 10/27/26 00:01, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > [...] > > The SysLord had a serial terminal, but all > the rest of us had to do cards. I started with punch cards and switched early to a terminal. (Frankly, the cards had an advantage; the terminal made us stay constantly in front of it; write code, make some changes/fixes, compile, rinse repeat. With the cards we spent time beforehand designing the code, seeing and fixing all errors in one turn. It turned out to be, WRT net-time, more efficient. But, OTOH, fixing a punching mistake was more time consuming; needed a lot discipline and attention.) > >> >> PS: The nastiest thing I've encountered with the >> card deck was that a friend exchanged all my cards >> which carried the word 'BEGIN' with cards carrying >> the word 'SADAT' - just as a hilarious play with >> words WRT two international politicians back then. >> Not so funny for me when I noticed all the syntax >> errors and had to wait another hour for the next >> batch run. > > Admit it, was a CLEVER joke ! (I can't tell you how pissed I was at that moment!) But, with some distance, it was a marvellous prank. (That's why I still remember it after 40+ years.) He was all like that. Sadly he died extremely young. > > SADAT ... do, but barely, remember it now. (I do recall his name only because of that joke.) Janis > [...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-28 05:26 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <zyidnfr4e4AiInz3nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #94728 |
On 10/27/26 20:12, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> On 2026-10-27 17:24, c186282 wrote:
>> On 10/27/26 00:01, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> The SysLord had a serial terminal, but all
>> the rest of us had to do cards.
>
> I started with punch cards and switched early to a
> terminal.
We got terminals, EVENTUALLY. But at the beginning
it was all punch cards. FORTRAN, COBOL, even that
neat-o newfangled PDP-11 lang called 'C'.
> (Frankly, the cards had an advantage; the terminal
> made us stay constantly in front of it; write code,
> make some changes/fixes, compile, rinse repeat.
> With the cards we spent time beforehand designing
> the code, seeing and fixing all errors in one turn.
> It turned out to be, WRT net-time, more efficient.
> But, OTOH, fixing a punching mistake was more time
> consuming; needed a lot discipline and attention.)
I'll say cards imposed a certain "discipline",
get it right the first time. But, imho, not really
a "good" solution.
>>>
>>> PS: The nastiest thing I've encountered with the
>>> card deck was that a friend exchanged all my cards
>>> which carried the word 'BEGIN' with cards carrying
>>> the word 'SADAT' - just as a hilarious play with
>>> words WRT two international politicians back then.
>>> Not so funny for me when I noticed all the syntax
>>> errors and had to wait another hour for the next
>>> batch run.
>>
>> Admit it, was a CLEVER joke !
>
> (I can't tell you how pissed I was at that moment!)
Well, I can imagine ... but it WAS a clever joke !
> But, with some distance, it was a marvellous prank.
> (That's why I still remember it after 40+ years.)
>
> He was all like that. Sadly he died extremely young.
Some do alas - the more 'boisterous' personalities
especially. "Candle burning twice as bright" maybe.
>> SADAT ... do, but barely, remember it now.
>
> (I do recall his name only because of that joke.)
Checked a couple hours ago ... barely ANY reference
to SADAT now ... and then only ABSTRACTS. It was
a sort of 'structural correctness' tool for FORTRAN.
Not really 'smart' at all, but it'd find gross
errors. DID use it ... but it was SO SO long ago.
Something like "PyCharm" can, sometimes, find
mis-indented/incomplete bits in Python code.
But even that IDE isn't as smart as desired.
None of them can fully grasp What You Intended.
Haven't even seen AI 'solutions' that are great
for that. More than once I've put some bit of
code one indent too far in or out for the
intended purpose. The debugging CAN be rather
difficult sometimes. Needs a human mind to
grasp Where It Went Wrong.
I miss the old Gen-3 programming IDEs. Not
too many of them left. Very helpful and
easy to navigate. Quick debugging and fixes.
The successors - FAR too complicated and/or
overly-abstract. Can't even figure out what
they're saying - much less the problems with
your code.
Kinda back to the Olde Days ... "get it right
the first time".
Lazarus/FPC and a few others still carry on the
old Gen-3 tradition. Love 'em. Shortest path
to success.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-28 19:33 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <76sES.99248$xwD5.81928@fx47.iad> |
| In reply to | #94733 |
On 2026-10-28, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
> I miss the old Gen-3 programming IDEs. Not
> too many of them left. Very helpful and
> easy to navigate. Quick debugging and fixes.
The closest I ever came to using an IDE was the
symbolic debugger that came with Lattice C for
MS-DOS. Simple, effective... and gone.
> The successors - FAR too complicated and/or
> overly-abstract. Can't even figure out what
> they're saying - much less the problems with
> your code.
My wife often says to me - on many topics other
than computers - "Why does everything have to
be such a huge project?" But with an IDE that's
exactly what it is. Want to write "Hello, world"?
You have to create a project. On the few times
I was desperate enough to try an IDE so I could
use its debugger, I got so bogged down in project
politics that I went back to sprinkling printf()s
through my code - which was faster in the end. It's
text editors and makefiles for me, thankyouverymuch.
Most people don't know the difference between
complexity and sophistication, and are usually
more impressed by complexity. From incomprehensible
(but pretty!) web sites to security holes you can
drive a truck through, those chickens are now coming
home to roost. Big time.
Perfection is achieved, not when there
is nothing more to add, but when there
is nothing left to take away.
-- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
The KISS principle would really hurt sales, though,
so it had to go.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | In this world there are
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | two kinds of people:
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | 1. Those who can extrapolate
/ \ if you read it the right way. | from incomplete data.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-29 00:19 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <nkfho2F6rc9U5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94751 |
On Wed, 28 Oct 2026 19:33:23 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > The closest I ever came to using an IDE was the symbolic debugger that > came with Lattice C for MS-DOS. Simple, effective... and gone. I missed that one although I did use MS C after they bought Lattice and developed it further. I will say for its era Microsoft C had excellent hard copy documentation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-29 12:27 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <11bvs57$3gfju$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94762 |
rbowman wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS (fixed): > On Wed, 28 Oct 2026 19:33:23 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >> The closest I ever came to using an IDE was the symbolic debugger that >> came with Lattice C for MS-DOS. Simple, effective... and gone. > > I missed that one although I did use MS C after they bought Lattice and > developed it further. I will say for its era Microsoft C had excellent > hard copy documentation. I agree with that last sentence. In the 80's the manuals for their C and FORTRAN were very good, and obviously inspired by the layout of DEC's manuals. -- backups: always in season, never out of style.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Josef Möllers <josef@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-28 17:01 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <nkekj8F5jptU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94728 |
On 28.10.26 01:12, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > On 2026-10-27 17:24, c186282 wrote: >> On 10/27/26 00:01, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >> [...] >> >> The SysLord had a serial terminal, but all >> the rest of us had to do cards. > > I started with punch cards and switched early to a > terminal. Ah ... yes ... The Olde Times ;-) I started studying CS in 1977 (after two years trying my luck at EE). Indeed, we too had to use punched cards in the beginning. > (Frankly, the cards had an advantage; the terminal > made us stay constantly in front of it; write code, > make some changes/fixes, compile, rinse repeat. > With the cards we spent time beforehand designing > the code, seeing and fixing all errors in one turn. > It turned out to be, WRT net-time, more efficient. > But, OTOH, fixing a punching mistake was more time > consuming; needed a lot discipline and attention.) 100% +1! Think twice before punching. I had been told once that IBM developers did not have a compiler or such at their disposal but only a text editor, so they, too, had to think twice before committing their code. > >> >>> >>> PS: The nastiest thing I've encountered with the >>> card deck was that a friend exchanged all my cards >>> which carried the word 'BEGIN' with cards carrying >>> the word 'SADAT' - just as a hilarious play with >>> words WRT two international politicians back then. >>> Not so funny for me when I noticed all the syntax >>> errors and had to wait another hour for the next >>> batch run. >> >> Admit it, was a CLEVER joke ! > > (I can't tell you how pissed I was at that moment!) > > But, with some distance, it was a marvellous prank. > (That's why I still remember it after 40+ years.) > > He was all like that. Sadly he died extremely young. > >> >> SADAT ... do, but barely, remember it now. > > (I do recall his name only because of that joke.) This is SOOO funny! At that time I myself had put a note on the wall stating that with the developments then the keyword BEGIN should be replaced by SADAT. I'm 70 now, retired 4 years ago. Josef
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-28 17:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <11bt94v$139ta$9@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94744 |
On 2026-10-28 17:01, Josef Möllers wrote: > [...] > > I had been told once that IBM developers did not have a compiler or such > at their disposal but only a text editor, so they, too, had to think > twice before committing their code. This almost sounds like the joke where the editor was actually just the 'cat' command. :-) >>>> PS: The nastiest thing I've encountered with the >>>> card deck was that a friend exchanged all my cards >>>> which carried the word 'BEGIN' with cards carrying >>>> the word 'SADAT' - just as a hilarious play with >>>> words WRT two international politicians back then. >>>> Not so funny for me when I noticed all the syntax >>>> errors and had to wait another hour for the next >>>> batch run. >>> >>> Admit it, was a CLEVER joke ! >> >> (I can't tell you how pissed I was at that moment!) >> >> But, with some distance, it was a marvellous prank. >> (That's why I still remember it after 40+ years.) >> >> He was all like that. Sadly he died extremely young. >> >>> >>> SADAT ... do, but barely, remember it now. >> >> (I do recall his name only because of that joke.) > > This is SOOO funny! At that time I myself had put a note on the wall > stating that with the developments then the keyword BEGIN should be > replaced by SADAT. Wow, what coincidence! :-) > > I'm 70 now, retired 4 years ago. > > Josef Janis, retired (hopefully only physically) as well
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-28 18:18 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <nkesjgF6rc9U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94744 |
On Wed, 28 Oct 2026 17:01:44 +0100, Josef Möllers wrote: > Ah ... yes ... The Olde Times ;-) > I started studying CS in 1977 (after two years trying my luck at EE). > Indeed, we too had to use punched cards in the beginning. The IBM 2260 terminal came out in 1964 but I didn't see one until I interviewed with IBM/Owego in 1968. If there were any in the college they were buried in a cave. I didn't get the job. IBM found my programming aptitude questionable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David LaRue <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-28 23:28 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <XnsB4F3C606CC1B5hueydlltampabayrrcom@157.180.91.226> |
| In reply to | #94749 |
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote in news:nkesjgF6rc9U1 @mid.individual.net: > On Wed, 28 Oct 2026 17:01:44 +0100, Josef Möllers wrote: > >> Ah ... yes ... The Olde Times ;-) >> I started studying CS in 1977 (after two years trying my luck at EE). >> Indeed, we too had to use punched cards in the beginning. > > The IBM 2260 terminal came out in 1964 but I didn't see one until I > interviewed with IBM/Owego in 1968. If there were any in the college they > were buried in a cave. > > I didn't get the job. IBM found my programming aptitude questionable. I too grew up accessing computers (the big iron) first with cards and later with terminals as they became available around campus. I agree that cards or anything low tech makes the developer first think about what they want to build and then do so. I had a slight advantage by the time my parents let me take college level computing with a friend at high school. I started on paper with imaginary simple computers via a Saturday morning show on PBS or more likely WGN Chicago. That was much earlier in my life, perhaps Junior High when I was also in an elective class to earn my Amateur Radio Novice Licence. Upon earning that and quickly moving to Technician, I became a member of the local ARRL Club. There I met all kinds of electricians, radio and antenna experts, and one Advanced class leader with his own antenna farm on his farm. He was doing moon bounce and slow scan TV. He showed me his latest project -- a home built Z80 Computer that booted by flipping switches to input the very tiny OS or a simple program. Now that really helped me form my programming and diagnostic capabilities. Thankfully all the Hams and teachers I met over the years were eager to share their knowledge. I loved teachers from any class that would go outside the curriculum and teach students outside class too. I hated students that would interupt a teacher with a question like "Is that going to be on the test?". I loved great teachers and quickly exited the few classes with poor teachers. Starting early classes on any subject with "low tech" helps form the student's mind. Ah the memories of a life well lived. Thank you to all the teachers who helped us form our minds! P.S. During those first years on cards for FORTRAN and COBOL a friend and I "competed" for solving programs with the least lines, comments excluded.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 13 of 23 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 … 23 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web