First Google hit: It was the arithmetic process of *Abacus* that led to the development of *Computers*. While *abacus* is an ancient calculating tool, *Computers* are modern tools, which performs many functions. The *computers* have become part and parcel of human beings. *Abacus* can also be called as the oldest *computer*.
On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 12:24 PM Tony Thigpen <[email protected]> wrote: > Incorrect. The abacus is not a computer, it is a "calculating tool". The > computer using the calculating tool is the human brain. If the Abacus is > a computer, so is a pencil and paper where we use tally marks. > > Wayne, you are starting to make everyone doubt your sanity. :-) > > Tony Thigpen > > Wayne Bickerdike wrote on 7/18/20 6:29 PM: > > An Abacus is a computer. The beads are moved. > > > > On Sun, Jul 19, 2020, 08:23 Charles Mills <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> What exactly would "move" mean in a computer memory context? We move > >> physical objects: they cease to occupy one space and instead occupy > >> another. But a computer memory holds information. You can no more move > data > >> in memory from one place to another than you can move knowledge from my > >> head to yours. You get a copy; I still have the original. I suppose for > >> some security purpose a machine might implement "copy and clear": kind > of > >> like an MVC plus an XC on the source location. You could argue that was > a > >> move. > >> > >> You can "move" a disk file in that the space it formerly occupied > becomes > >> unallocated, just like a shelf becomes free if you move a stack of books > >> from one shelf to another. IEHMOVE moves datasets. > >> > >> Another word -- kind of COBOL related -- that our industry uses with a > >> meaning different from English is SORT. In English "sort" means to put > into > >> appropriate sub-groups: sort the forks and spoons into their drawers. > What > >> we mean by SORT in English is order: have the children line up ordered > by > >> height; order the files alphabetically. > >> > >> Charles > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] > On > >> Behalf Of Tony Thigpen > >> Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2020 11:21 AM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: COBOL and English was Re: Still COBOL After All These > Years? > >> > >> The only "destructive move" I have been able to find (i.e, a real move, > >> not a copy) based on one real response, is in C (and derivatives) that > >> is not really what we are talking about. > >> > >> It's move of a "change the pointer to the variable and drop the original > >> storage" type of thing. And, it's a function, not a verb. And, it > >> relates more to what happens to intermediate fields as they are used by > >> C and not programmer variables. > >> > >> Bob, I understand your confusion, because I agree with you. Such a > >> language does not really exist. The excuse of "mv" vs. "cp" in linux is > >> not a valid example as those are file management commands, not data > >> manipulation verbs as used in programming languages. > >> > >> And, to get back to the original statement by someone that Cobol is not > >> English because of the use of MOVE instead of COPY is just silly. > >> > >> Tony Thigpen > >> > >> Bob Bridges wrote on 7/18/20 10:51 AM: > >>> You may have done so - by now I don't remember who said what first :) - > >> but I was referring to Mr Crayford's post below. As I understood them, > >> Tony Thigpen wrote that a MOVE is actually a copy, and Mr Crayford > >> disagreed. I'm confused; is there any computer language in which the > verb > >> MOVE exists and doesn't actually mean COPY? > >>> > >>> ...or SET, as you suggest. Yes, I like SET better. > >>> > >>> --- > >>> Bob Bridges, [email protected], cell 336 382-7313 > >>> > >>> /* In all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question > >> mark on the things you have long taken for granted. -Bertrand Russell > >> (1872-1970) */ > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] > >> On Behalf Of Wayne Bickerdike > >>> Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2020 04:42 > >>> > >>> I referred to this since someone said that COBOL is English like. As > such > >>> the language is wrong because it does not describe correctly in English > >>> what happens. COPY, REPLICATE, PROPAGATE would all be more precise > >> English. > >>> > >>> IDEAL(CA/Broadcom) has MOVE and SET. They do the same thing. Which do > >> you > >>> prefer: > >>> > >>> MOVE A TO B or > >>> SET B = A ? > >>> > >>> --- On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 4:30 PM Bob Bridges <[email protected] > > > >> wrote: > >>>> Am I missing something obvious, here? In what computer language(s) > is a > >>>> move not actually a copy? And how? > >>>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: David Crayford > >>>> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 00:53 > >>>> > >>>> I beg to differ! For the programming languages I code in use there is > a > >>>> huge difference between copy and move semantics. > >>>> > >>>> --- On 2020-07-17 11:12 AM, Tony Thigpen wrote: > >>>>> From the start, MOVE in the programming world has been equated to > what > >>>>> you are calling a COPY. > >>> > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > >>> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > >>> > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > >> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > >> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > >> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- Wayne V. Bickerdike ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
