Then there was the term "analog computer".
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of Joel C. Ewing [[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2020 9:07 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: COBOL and English was Re: Still COBOL After All These Years? I tend to side with Tony on this one. One can find many things on the Internet that are either imprecise or just plain wrong. The meaning of "computer", like many words, has evolved over time. At some point post WWII, certainly by the 1960s for the general public, an Abacus, a slide ruler, a desk calculator, etc. would no longer be considered a computer because those devices lack both the programmed action and conditional logic capabilities that word now implies. In the early pre-digital-computer days of NASA, "computer" was used to describe the people who used pencil & paper and other tools to perform computations and was an actual job title. If you are going to use a broad enough definition of "computer" to include the Abacus, then clearly men and women are the oldest known computers. Joel C. Ewing On 7/18/20 10:23 PM, Wayne Bickerdike wrote: > 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. >>>>> ... -- Joel C. Ewing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
