RE: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

gt; Subject: Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've > sent email from] > > >> The main thing C has that most other languages don't is *unsafe* data > >> typing - the ability to subvert the type system at the drop of a > >> cast, and the pr

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Apr 28, 2016, at 8:38 AM, Liam Proven wrote: > I loved BeOS but never saw the Be Book. :-( Sorry if this is a duplicate, I’m behind on the list by a little. I think the Be Book is effectively on-line at https://www.haiku-os.org/legacy-docs/bebook/ Haiku, open-source and

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

On 4/29/16 6:02 PM, Ian S. King wrote: I would actually argue that C++, Java and C# are not object-oriented languages. They are languages with syntax that supports object-oriented programming - note that the original C++ was a preprocessor for a C compiler. I'll disagree with this on behalf

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 04/29/2016 01:51 PM, ben wrote: Did Unix have any other languages with it? I evaluated UNIX FORTRAN for my research group in 1976 or so. It was not pretty. We found it took about 750 ms to format a single floating point number and print it out. This was probably before we got out

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 04/29/2016 11:59 AM, Diane Bruce wrote: Pascal and the Bell Northern Research, BNR (prior to Nortel amalgamation) derivative were pretty awful. Fortunately I never had to use the BNR version. They both suffered from not having separate compilation units, at least until near the end of BNR.

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

>> Sure. Adobe postscript is a thread interpretative language (TIL). >> It looks very much like FORTH if you squint real hard. You'd have to squint pretty hard. I'd say that PostScript is FORTH with the stacks hidden and more datatypes added. The major thing it shares with FORTH is that it's a

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

>> The main thing C has that most other languages don't is *unsafe* >> data typing - the ability to subvert the type system at the drop of >> a cast, and the programming tradition to do this a lot. > {Sighs.} You really seem to have it out for C. I didn't write that the double-quoted text, but

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

On 29 April 2016 at 15:43, Chuck Guzis wrote: > I don't know what people do now. > The answer, apparently: Step 1: Install package manager of choice. Step 2: Create a blank project using the package manager and Framework X (which is the "in" thing this week). Step 3: Slap

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

I would actually argue that C++, Java and C# are not object-oriented languages. They are languages with syntax that supports object-oriented programming - note that the original C++ was a preprocessor for a C compiler. Smalltalk, Simula, and more recently languages like Ruby are object-oriented

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

Those who claim that there's not much difference between C and assembly language have never run into a true CISC machine--or perhaps they rely only on libraries someone else has written. Writing a true global optimizing compiler that generates code as good as assembly is a nearly impossible task.

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

>> I like C for the most part, what you see is what you get. > Apparently you've never been burned by the way it handles bit fields. Not that I wrote the double-quoted line above, but...no, I don't think I have. Certainly not recently enough to remember it. But then, I don't assume more about

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 01:36:29PM -0700, Al Kossow wrote: > > > On 4/29/16 1:34 PM, ben wrote: > > >> The problem is that C doesn't just allow you to do stupid things, it's > >> actively encouraged. C doesn't just let you aim at your foot, it > >> defaults to aiming at your foot. > >> > > I

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

On Fri, 29 Apr 2016, Eric Smith wrote: The problem is that C doesn't just allow you to do stupid things, it's actively encouraged. C doesn't just let you aim at your foot, it defaults to aiming at your foot. I like the title that Holub chose for his book: "Enough Rope To Shoot Yourself In The

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

> On 29 Apr 2016, at 22:31 , Diane Bruce wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:23:55PM -0600, Eric Smith wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Ian S. King wrote: >>> C is a lot like that saw - it doesn't have a lot of guards on it, and you >>> can do stupid

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

On 4/29/16 1:34 PM, ben wrote: >> The problem is that C doesn't just allow you to do stupid things, it's >> actively encouraged. C doesn't just let you aim at your foot, it >> defaults to aiming at your foot. >> > I like C for the most part, what you see is what you get. Apparently you've

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

On 4/29/2016 2:23 PM, Eric Smith wrote: On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Ian S. King wrote: C is a lot like that saw - it doesn't have a lot of guards on it, and you can do stupid things. The problem is that C doesn't just allow you to do stupid things, it's actively

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> and it was adopted by a very successful company (Sun) Unix had taken off big-time before Sun even appeared. Unix created Sun. Sun didn't create Unix. I remember one day when our department chair (community college CS) came running into the lab, very excited. "We're getting Suns! We're

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> On 29 Apr 2016, at 22:24 , Paul Koning wrote: > >>> So does Pascal. >> >> Which didn't have a lot of the capabilities needed to be system language at >> _that point in time_ (remember, this is about 'why did C succeed, back >> then'); >> it was, after all, originally

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:23:55PM -0600, Eric Smith wrote: > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Ian S. King wrote: > > C is a lot like that saw - it doesn't have a lot of guards on it, and you > > can do stupid things. > > The problem is that C doesn't just allow you to do stupid

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Ian S. King wrote: > C is a lot like that saw - it doesn't have a lot of guards on it, and you > can do stupid things. The problem is that C doesn't just allow you to do stupid things, it's actively encouraged. C doesn't just let you aim at your

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> On Apr 29, 2016, at 4:12 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > Oh, another factor that led to success for C, I suspect: I/O is not in the > language, it's handled by optional subroutine libraries. This made it very > easy for compilers/etc to produce language for stand-alone

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

Oh, another factor that led to success for C, I suspect: I/O is not in the language, it's handled by optional subroutine libraries. This made it very easy for compilers/etc to produce language for stand-alone systems. Compare PL/I, which needed a large subroutine library to run on bare hardware.

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

> On Apr 29, 2016, at 4:03 PM, Al Kossow wrote: > > > > On 4/29/16 12:43 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > >> I don't know what people do now. >> > > Find libraries that other people have written, glue something together, and > move on to the next project/job. > > Then scream

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 01:49:11PM -0400, Mouse wrote: > >> True, but again, *you shouldn't have to*. It means programmer > >> effort, brain power, is being wasted on thinking about being safe > >> instead of spent on writing better programs. > > True, but... > > > One side effect of this is

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 01:19:34PM -0400, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Diane Bruce > > > PL/M wasn't bad either. > > I forgot about PL/M... ;) > > > Telephone companies preferred deterministic behaviour from their code > > and operating systems. > > Not just telco's. Many

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

On 4/29/16 12:43 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > I don't know what people do now. > Find libraries that other people have written, glue something together, and move on to the next project/job. Then scream if you try to rebuild it later and the new version of the libraries didn't maintain backwards

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> From: Mouse > It's true that C is easy to use unsafely. ... I suspect it is not > possible to eliminate the ability to do stupid things in C without also > eliminating the ability to do some clever things in C. Oh so true. Computer science progress seems to be all about

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

On 04/29/2016 11:59 AM, Ian S. King wrote: > > Don't blame the tools - blame an educational system that doesn't > teach software engineering practice, but just teaches tools. "Hey, > hold my beer and watch this!" -- Ian Maybe--I can't say. At a very early stage in my career, I was exposed to

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> On Apr 29, 2016, at 3:25 PM, Diane Bruce wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 09:13:42PM +0200, Raymond Wiker wrote: >> >>> On 29 Apr 2016, at 21:10 , Paul Koning wrote: >>> >>> On Apr 29, 2016, at 3:01 PM, ben wrote:

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 03:10:38PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote: > > > On Apr 29, 2016, at 3:01 PM, ben wrote: > > > > I liked Forth when it was still threaded. > > ??? > > Base FORTH is not, in and of itself, threaded. PolyFORTH was if memory > serves. Then again,

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 09:13:42PM +0200, Raymond Wiker wrote: > > > On 29 Apr 2016, at 21:10 , Paul Koning wrote: > > > > > >> On Apr 29, 2016, at 3:01 PM, ben wrote: > >> > >> I liked Forth when it was still threaded. > > > > ??? > > > >

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> On 29 Apr 2016, at 21:10 , Paul Koning wrote: > > >> On Apr 29, 2016, at 3:01 PM, ben wrote: >> >> I liked Forth when it was still threaded. > > ??? > > Base FORTH is not, in and of itself, threaded. PolyFORTH was if memory > serves.

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> On Apr 29, 2016, at 3:01 PM, ben wrote: > > I liked Forth when it was still threaded. ??? Base FORTH is not, in and of itself, threaded. PolyFORTH was if memory serves. Then again, creating a thread scheduler (cooperative scheduler) for FORTH is just a modest

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

It was thus said that the Great Liam Proven once stated: > On 27 April 2016 at 22:13, Sean Conner wrote: > > Do you really think it's growing? I'd like very much to believe that. > I see little sign of it. I do hope you're right. I read Hacker News and some of the more

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 4/29/2016 11:03 AM, Swift Griggs wrote: My opinion is that benchmarking and subsequent proclamations using scripting languages is like racing snails vs slime molds (my money is on the snails, BTW). It's all fun until someone shows you a graph of the same algorithm in C and puts a

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Mouse wrote: > > My gripe with C is essentially the same as my grumbles with APL--it's > > far too easy to write obscure code and not document it. > > "There is not now, nor will there ever be, a language in which it's the > least bit

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 4/29/2016 9:55 AM, Paul Koning wrote: C just seemed to hit a sweet spot for functionality versus complexity - in the syntax, in the semantics; all over. I think it is a case of Darwin's principle, expressed correctly: "survival of the fit enough". C sucks pretty badly in any number of

RE: Gentoo (was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from)

<swiftgri...@gmail.com> Date: 4/29/2016 12:10 PM (GMT-05:00) To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk@classiccmp.org> Subject: Gentoo (was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from) On Fri, 29 Apr 2016, alexmcwhir...@triadic.us wrote: > Gentoo is

Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

> My gripe with C is essentially the same as my grumbles with APL--it's > far too easy to write obscure code and not document it. "There is not now, nor will there ever be, a language in which it's the least bit difficult to write bad code." Not quite true, of course; there are languages in

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

>> C is a high level PDP-11 assembler to this day. (auto increment and >> decrement) > This myth persists, but it's wrong [...] as DMR attests: [...] Note that PDP-11 autoincrement and autodecrement exist only when operating on pointers that are being indirected through, and even then only when

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 04/29/2016 10:49 AM, Mouse wrote: > Of course, the question is not whether C has flaws. The question is > why it's still being used despite those flaws. The answer, I > suspect, is what someone said about it being good enough. My gripe with C is essentially the same as my grumbles with

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> On Apr 29, 2016, at 1:49 PM, Mouse wrote: > > ... > I would have no problem with them if they were documented. But I've > yet to find one that is. I worked on a project writing code for a new > Android phone, once, and even as developers we had to use binary blob

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

>> True, but again, *you shouldn't have to*. It means programmer >> effort, brain power, is being wasted on thinking about being safe >> instead of spent on writing better programs. True, but... > One side effect of this is that it makes a lot of C programmers > pedants. ...this is also true,

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Apr 29, 2016, at 7:16 AM, Fred Cisin wrote: >>> And you do know what Apple MacOS was originally written in, don't you? >> On Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Chris Hanson wrote: >> >> The original Macintosh System Software was almost entirely M68000 assembly >> language. >> There were

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> From: Diane Bruce > PL/M wasn't bad either. I forgot about PL/M... > Telephone companies preferred deterministic behaviour from their code > and operating systems. Not just telco's. Many (most?) people doing stand-alone applications want this, or something close to it. >

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> On 29 Apr 2016, at 19:03 , Swift Griggs wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Apr 2016, Raymond Wiker wrote: >> The regular expression support in Perl is implemented in C, and are >> supposedly fairly fast. > > They are faster than some, like Ruby and slower than others like >

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Fri, 29 Apr 2016, Raymond Wiker wrote: > The regular expression support in Perl is implemented in C, and are > supposedly fairly fast. They are faster than some, like Ruby and slower than others like (apparently) LISP. > That didn't stop a Lisp programmer from implementing PCREs in Lisp

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 03:51:12PM +0200, Liam Proven wrote: > On 29 April 2016 at 15:09, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > > From: Swift Griggs > > ... > >> C is popular because C is popular. > > > > Yes, but that had to start somewhere. > > > > I think it _became_

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> On 29 Apr 2016, at 16:05 , Swift Griggs wrote: > > While I know exactly what folks mean, I will attempt a weak defense. Perl > has extremely strong string manipulation features, including strong (and > easy) support for PCRE's. Those regex's are the main reason folks

Gentoo (was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from)

On Fri, 29 Apr 2016, alexmcwhir...@triadic.us wrote: > Gentoo is powerful because you get to chose your init system, kernel > options, and every other piece of software that runs on the box. Other than the swapping init systems, many OSS OS distributions have the ability to choose what you want

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 2016-04-29 11:06, Todd Goodman wrote: * Liam Proven [160429 09:44]: [..SNIP..] Those are /really/ different. Gentoo is just putting low-profile tyres and plastic spoilers on a boring little family car. You fundamentally misunderstand Gentoo so it's not surprising you'd

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> On Apr 29, 2016, at 9:09 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > ... >> From: Liam Proven > >> C is popular because C is popular. > > Yes, but that had to start somewhere. > > I think it _became_ popular for two reasons: i) it was 'the' language of > Unix, and Unix was so

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Fri, 29 Apr 2016, Todd Goodman wrote: > You don't like it (nor any Linux/GNU system it seems if you consider > them all "boring little family cars.") While I wouldn't use the denegrating language, I do share his sentiment. Post systemd debacle, I'm done with Linux as any kind of advocate.

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> From: Liam Proven >> I think it _became_ popular for two reasons: ... ii) C was a lot better >> than many of the alternatives _at the time it first appeared_ (for a >> number of reasons, which I won't expand on unless there is interest). > I am indeed interested. OK, have

Plan9 and Inferno (was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from)

On Thu, 4/28/16, Liam Proven wrote: >>> The efforts to fix and improve Unix -- Plan 9, Inferno -- forgotten. > > It is, true, but it's a sideline now. And the steps made by Inferno > seem to have had even less impact. I'd like to see the 2 merged back > into 1. Actually, it's

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

* Liam Proven [160429 09:44]: [..SNIP..] > Those are /really/ different. Gentoo is just putting low-profile tyres > and plastic spoilers on a boring little family car. You fundamentally misunderstand Gentoo so it's not surprising you'd be so condescending towards it and the

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Fri, 29 Apr 2016, Chris Hanson wrote: I think both Lisa and Mac Smalltalk went to market, or at least to academia and industry if they weren’t available as products. I know that the Lisa went to market. Sorta. Well before public announcement, I played with one briefly in my cousin's

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 29 April 2016 at 15:09, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Liam Proven > >> C is popular because C is popular. > > Yes, but that had to start somewhere. > > I think it _became_ popular for two reasons: i) it was 'the' language of > Unix, and Unix was so much

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

And you do know what Apple MacOS was originally written in, don't you? On Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Chris Hanson wrote: The original Macintosh System Software was almost entirely M68000 assembly language. There were a couple parts of the original System Software that were written in Pascal, but by and

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Liam Proven wrote: > I just have dabbled in a lot more systems and platforms than most. I > never specialised. I went doe-eyed crazy for all things Unix in 1992. However, I also have a far too off-balance curiosity:motivation index. I get interested in a LOT of stuff (just

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 29 April 2016 at 15:09, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Swift Griggs > > > even though there is *more* overall documentation on the Internet, the > > docs you get with hardware and tools are nowhere near as good as they > > were in the 80s AFAIK. > > I

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 29 April 2016 at 14:50, Todd Goodman wrote: > * Liam Proven [160428 18:41]: > [..SNIP..] >> > Gentoo Linux is my >> > distro of choice simply because i can pick, choose, and compile everything >> > i >> > want for just about any arch. >> >> I tried it

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> From: Swift Griggs > even though there is *more* overall documentation on the Internet, the > docs you get with hardware and tools are nowhere near as good as they > were in the 80s AFAIK. I think that's partially because the speed of product cycles has sped up; there just

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

* Liam Proven [160428 18:41]: [..SNIP..] > > Gentoo Linux is my > > distro of choice simply because i can pick, choose, and compile everything i > > want for just about any arch. > > I tried it years ago. I found it a very unpleasant experience, and > went to some communities,

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Apr 27, 2016, at 9:55 AM, Liam Proven wrote: > > Apple goes its own way, but has forgotten the truly innovative > projects it had pre-NeXT, such as Dylan. Dylan, despite being created by a bunch of Symbolics (and other Common Lisp) folks, was actually less innovative than

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Apr 27, 2016, at 1:25 PM, Fred Cisin wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Sean Conner wrote: >> Smalltalk has other issues. In the 80s, there were not many machines >> capable of running Smalltalk (I'm not aware of any implementation on micros, >> serious or not) > > Apple

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Apr 25, 2016, at 7:38 AM, Liam Proven wrote: > > And you do know what Apple MacOS was originally written in, don't you? The original Macintosh System Software was almost entirely M68000 assembly language. There were a couple parts of the original System Software that

RE: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Rich Alderson wrote: > I received undergraduate and graduate degrees in historical linguistics; That is an interesting field of study. I don't really understand a lick of it (talk about jargon! nobody beats linguists) but it's neat. As academic fields go, I'd do operations

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 4/28/2016 7:59 AM, Liam Proven wrote: On 27 April 2016 at 22:13, Sean Conner wrote: It was thus said that the Great Liam Proven once stated: On 26 April 2016 at 16:41, Liam Proven wrote: When I was playing with home micros (mainly Sinclair and Amstrad;

Re: Abstraction levels and tool evolution, versus bugs - Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 4/27/2016 4:50 PM, Swift Griggs wrote: On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Toby Thain wrote: I stick with C because I don't want (much) more abstraction than it offers for the applications I write or maintain. How ever hardware design is still knowledge needed, with all the strange Caches and logic

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 28 April 2016 at 16:52, wrote: > On 2016-04-28 10:44, Liam Proven wrote: >> >> On 28 April 2016 at 16:35, Mouse wrote: >>> The depressing (to me) part is that there seems to be a place for >>> decent-quality restaurants in the same

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

* On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 06:48:21PM +, Rich Alderson wrote: > I received undergraduate and graduate degrees in historical linguistics; (!!!) It's good to see Linguist here. While I never did receive my degree, linguistics was my major, and historical

RE: strangest systems I've sent email from

From: Liam Proven Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 6:39 AM BTW, an expansion for someone who missed a humorous point very early on: "FTHI" means "For the humour-impaired", and was followed by numerous smilicons. > On 27 April 2016 at 20:15, Swift Griggs > wrote: >> All

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

Liam Proven writes: > the last iterations of Genera ran on Tru64 on Alphas, but under an > emulator. The emulator has been ported to Linux and x86-64. http://www.cliki.net/VLM_on_Linux

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 2016-04-28 10:44, Liam Proven wrote: On 28 April 2016 at 16:35, Mouse wrote: But the marketing men got to it and ruined its security and elegance, to produce the lipstick-and-high-heels Windows XP. That version, insecure and flakey with its terrible bodged-in

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Thu, 4/28/16, Rod Smallwood wrote: > How about morse by a key made in 1898 . Then cw to ascii serial > converter and  normal program input after that. I've often thought of doing that! Though my key dates from more like the '40s or '50s. I see a weekend

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 28/04/2016 16:54, Brian L. Stuart wrote: On Thu, 4/28/16, Liam Proven wrote: Oh, yes, indeed! I have a Plan 9 VM, and I intend to try it on my Pi. But it's had relatively little impact on mainstream Unix. I would agree, given the qualification "relatively." There are

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Thu, 4/28/16, Liam Proven wrote: > Oh, yes, indeed! I have a Plan 9 VM, and I intend to try it on my Pi. > But it's had relatively little impact on mainstream Unix. I would agree, given the qualification "relatively." There are several things that have made their way from

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 28 April 2016 at 16:35, Mouse wrote: >>> But the marketing men got to it and ruined its security and >>> elegance, to produce the lipstick-and-high-heels Windows XP. That >>> version, insecure and flakey with its terrible bodged-in browser, >>> that, of course, was

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

>> But the marketing men got to it and ruined its security and >> elegance, to produce the lipstick-and-high-heels Windows XP. That >> version, insecure and flakey with its terrible bodged-in browser, >> that, of course, was the one that sold. > â??Consistent mediocrity, delivered on a

Re: History [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

>> Well, I think "Sun god" is a significant overstatement, and I'm >> pretty sure I never capitalized the "der", but yes, that was me. > It's not an overstatement to me, sir. Thank you. I'm glad to hear I helped; I've received so very much from the net - as cynical and bitter as I tend to wax

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 27 April 2016 at 22:13, Sean Conner wrote: > It was thus said that the Great Liam Proven once stated: >> On 26 April 2016 at 16:41, Liam Proven wrote: >> >> When I was playing with home micros (mainly Sinclair and Amstrad; the >> American stuff was just too

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 27 April 2016 at 20:50, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Liam Proven > > > There's the not-remotely-safe kinda-sorta C in a web browser, > > Javascript. > > Love the rant, which I mostly agree with (_especially_ that one). Thank you! The JS line is the one

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 27 April 2016 at 20:15, Swift Griggs wrote: > On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Liam Proven wrote: >> I wish to apologise for this. It was unjustified and unfair, and >> unjustly ad-hom as well. > > Well, that's mighty big of you Liam. You're welcome, Swift. I'll try to learn from

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 27 April 2016 at 19:44, Brian L. Stuart wrote: > On Wed, 4/27/16, Liam Proven wrote: >> ... with a few weirdos saying that 6809 was better than >> ... and a few weirdos maintained that Forth was better. >> ... while the weirdoes use FreeBSD. > > I've

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> On 27 Apr 2016, at 22:13 , Sean Conner wrote: > > COBRA was dead by the mid-90s and had nothing (that I know of) to do with > Linux. And the lumbering GUI apps, RPC, etc that you are complaining about > is the userland stuff---nothing to do with the Linux kernel (okay,

Re: History [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, John Willis wrote: What IS known as FidoNet (1:138/142 here. :) ) and it's still a political shit-show, mostly due to people from Zone 2. *sigh* Why, hello, 1:138/142! 1:305/1 here! #fidobros! *laughs uproariously* g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007

Re: Abstraction levels and tool evolution, versus bugs - Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> On Apr 27, 2016, at 6:14 PM, Toby Thain wrote: > > Modern languages can indeed wipe out large classes of bugs (including many of > those that lead to vulnerabilities). But *every* advance in abstraction does. > > I like Professor Benjamin Pierce's way of putting

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> On Apr 27, 2016, at 5:58 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > >> From: Paul Koning > >> while Unix is reasonably secure, application writers have managed to >> create massive numbers of security holes that have nothing to do with >> defects of the OS, and aren't cured by a

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On 27/04/2016 21:25, Fred Cisin wrote: On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Sean Conner wrote: Smalltalk has other issues. In the 80s, there were not many machines capable of running Smalltalk (I'm not aware of any implementation on micros, serious or not) Apple Lisa. Don't know whether it ever went to

Re: Abstraction levels and tool evolution, versus bugs - Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Toby Thain wrote: > Modern languages can indeed wipe out large classes of bugs (including > many of those that lead to vulnerabilities). But *every* advance in > abstraction does. While I follow your thesis here, I would also point out that the reason that a lot of C

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> From: Paul Koning > while Unix is reasonably secure, application writers have managed to > create massive numbers of security holes that have nothing to do with > defects of the OS, and aren't cured by a better OS. On a secure system (i.e. OS plus underlying hardware),

Re: History [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

> > >> What IS known as FidoNet (1:138/142 here. :) ) and it's still a political > shit-show, mostly due to people from Zone 2. *sigh* > > Why, hello, 1:138/142! 1:305/1 here!

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

ril 27, 2016 1:25:12 PM Subject: Re: strangest systems I've sent email from On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Sean Conner wrote: > Smalltalk has other issues. In the 80s, there were not many machines > capable of running Smalltalk (I'm not aware of any implementation on micros, > serious or not)

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Sean Conner wrote: Smalltalk has other issues. In the 80s, there were not many machines capable of running Smalltalk (I'm not aware of any implementation on micros, serious or not) Apple Lisa. Don't know whether it ever went to market.

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

It was thus said that the Great Noel Chiappa once stated: > > From: Liam Proven > > > There's the not-remotely-safe kinda-sorta C in a web browser, > > Javascript. > > Love the rant, which I mostly agree with (_especially_ that one). A couple of > comments: > > > So they still

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

It was thus said that the Great Liam Proven once stated: > On 26 April 2016 at 16:41, Liam Proven wrote: > > When I was playing with home micros (mainly Sinclair and Amstrad; the > American stuff was just too expensive for Brits in the early-to-mid > 1980s), the culture was

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> On Apr 27, 2016, at 2:50 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > ... > It's not clear to me that a 'better language' is going to get rid of that, > because there will always be bugs (and the bigger the application, and the > more it gets changed, the more there will be). The

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

> From: Liam Proven > There's the not-remotely-safe kinda-sorta C in a web browser, > Javascript. Love the rant, which I mostly agree with (_especially_ that one). A couple of comments: > So they still have C like holes and there are frequent patches and > updates to try to

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

On Wed, 4/27/16, Liam Proven wrote: > ... with a few weirdos saying that 6809 was better than > ... and a few weirdos maintained that Forth was better. > ... while the weirdoes use FreeBSD. I've never been more proud to be classified as a weirdo :) > The efforts to fix and

<    1   2   3   >