Counting in binary on ones fingers was something I first ran into at
age 11 when found a book on Military Electronics in a surplus
store. Everything simplified, but in computer section found binary
system explained with using fingers to represent bits. That was
something that I used
I too count sheep with my fingers, but I never get past zero due to the
lack of sheep.:-)
Tom Hunter
On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 5:34 PM Tor Arntsen via cctalk
wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 at 03:27, dwight via cctalk
> wrote:
> > If we'd thought about it we could count to 1023 on our fingers.
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 08:50:56PM -0700, ben via cctalk wrote:
> On 2/1/2021 6:07 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
[...]
>> You're describing a failing in C and similar languages stuck in the
>> 1960s. Here's a Rust method that does add-exposing-carry:
>>
On 2/1/2021 6:07 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 02:05:37PM -0700, ben via cctalk wrote:
[...]
I don't see languages in general have improved since the the mid
1960's. Hardware and language models don't reflect each other,
and don't have extendable data sizes and
On 2/1/2021 12:15 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 20:00, Fred Cisin via cctalk
wrote:
I had always been told, "A pint is a pound, the world around."
Aha! Does that mean a pint of water weighs 1lb?
Interesting. I did not know.
Who Knows?
It just works of beer or
reply with the same "Re:".
After 29 "Re: APL\360", the next such msg would have subject line
rewritten to "New topic 1", and the next (up to) 28 "Re: APL\360"
would be similarly re-written (the '28' is decremented for every "Re:
APL\360"
and eve
On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 08:15:25PM +0100, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 20:00, Fred Cisin via cctalk
> wrote:
>> I had always been told, "A pint is a pound, the world around."
"The world" meaning "the USA", of course.
> Aha! Does that mean a pint of water weighs 1lb?
> On Feb 1, 2021, at 2:34 PM, Dave Wade G4UGM via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>>> ...
>>> I had always been told, "A pint is a pound, the world around."
>>
>> Aha! Does that mean a pint of water weighs 1lb?
>>
>> Interesting. I did not know.
>
> Typical American statement, where "world" means
> On Feb 1, 2021, at 2:13 PM, David Bridgham via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> ...
> Sure, one can get into the story that our numbers come from Arabic and
> Arabic is written right-to-left so in fact they were originally
> little-endian and just didn't get flipped around when incorporated into
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk On Behalf Of Liam Proven via
> cctalk
> Sent: 01 February 2021 19:15
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
>
> Subject: Re: APL\360
>
> On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 20:00, Fred Cisin via cctalk
> wrote:
On 2/1/21 1:59 PM, John Ames via cctech wrote:
> This one has always boggled me, because it's the one aspect of the
> Endian Wars where there's a simple, straightforward answer grounded in
> basic mathematics - base ^ digit-number only gives the correct
> place-value when the lowest-order bit is
> From: Chuck Guzis
> Numbering of bits in a word is also interesting. Is the high order bit
> in a 64 bit word, bit 0 or bit 63? Both conventions have been employed.
This one has always boggled me, because it's the one aspect of the
Endian Wars where there's a simple, straightforward answer
On 2/1/21 11:00 AM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
>> On 2021-02-01 10:59, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
>>> I do not know what a fluid ounce is, or how many are in a pint.
> On Mon, 1 Feb 2021, emanuel stiebler via cctalk wrote:
>> not enough?
>> ;-)
>
> I had always been told, "A pint is a pound,
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 20:00, Fred Cisin via cctalk
wrote:
>
> I had always been told, "A pint is a pound, the world around."
Aha! Does that mean a pint of water weighs 1lb?
Interesting. I did not know.
> I had already assumed that pub prices had inflated to higher than a pound.
It was under
, February 1, 2021 7:59 AM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: APL\360
On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 at 02:56, dwight via cctalk wrote:
> I constantly see people claiming how much better decimal is than the English
> system of meassurment.
Um. I am a native English speaker, a
On 2021-02-01 10:59, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
I do not know what a fluid ounce is, or how many are in a pint.
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021, emanuel stiebler via cctalk wrote:
not enough?
;-)
I had always been told, "A pint is a pound, the world around."
I had already assumed that pub prices had
We don't need another big-endian/little-endian battle
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
Little-endian tends to be more useful when doing multi-word arithmetic.
Big-endian is handy for text and human-readable numbers. That there are
heated arguments over which endianness is
On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 at 03:27, dwight via cctalk wrote:
If we'd thought about it we could count to 1023 on our fingers.
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021, Tor Arntsen via cctalk wrote:
Some sheep herders in (IIRC) the Caucasus do, or did at least. I
learned about that some decades ago. Counting sheep on
On 2021-02-01 11:40, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
> Whose pint? UK Imperial pint = 568 ml. US liquid pint = 473 ml.
That explains some conversations I had with people there ;-)
On 2/1/21 5:26 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
> On every CPU I've used, LSB has always been bit 0. Unlike endianness, this
> is clearly better than the other way round since the value is 2**bit_number
> and the bit number doesn't change if the value is converted into a different
> word
It's actually 568.26. Easy to work out, in Canada the gallon is defined
as being 454609 ten millionths of a cubic metre,
Nigel
Nigel Johnson, MSc., MIEEE, MCSE VE3ID/G4AJQ/VA3MCU
Amateur Radio, the origin of the open-source concept!
Skype: TILBURY2591 nw.john...@ieee.org
On 2021-02-01
On 2/1/21 8:10 AM, emanuel stiebler via cctalk wrote:
> On 2021-02-01 10:59, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
>> I do not know what a fluid ounce is, or how many are in a pint.
>
> not enough?
> ;-)
>
Whose pint? UK Imperial pint = 568 ml. US liquid pint = 473 ml.
Both are one-eighth of a
On 2021-02-01 10:59, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> I do not know what a fluid ounce is, or how many are in a pint.
not enough?
;-)
On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 at 02:56, dwight via cctalk wrote:
> I constantly see people claiming how much better decimal is than the English
> system of meassurment.
Um. I am a native English speaker, as well as an English citizen, and
I count in decimal.
Do you mean metric (SI / Systeme
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 22:14, Fred Cisin via cctalk
wrote:
> such as 42
> WHATDOYOUGETWHENYOUMULTIPLYSIXBYNINE
--
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 01:12:55PM -0800, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> Most old (pre S/360) digit/character-addressable architectures were
> big-endian (i.e. higher-order characters occupied lower addresses)
> Even PDP-11 isn't strictly little-endian, though Intel X86 definitely is.
I
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 10:34, Tor Arntsen via cctalk
wrote:
>
> Some sheep herders in (IIRC) the Caucasus do, or did at least. I
> learned about that some decades ago. Counting sheep on their fingers.
> I use the system sometimes.
Fred Pohl's short story "Digits and Dastards" explains it well.
I
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 02:05:37PM -0700, ben via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> I don't see languages in general have improved since the the mid
> 1960's. Hardware and language models don't reflect each other,
> and don't have extendable data sizes and types.
> PL/I seems to have been the best,but too
On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 at 03:27, dwight via cctalk wrote:
> If we'd thought about it we could count to 1023 on our fingers.
> Dwight
Some sheep herders in (IIRC) the Caucasus do, or did at least. I
learned about that some decades ago. Counting sheep on their fingers.
I use the system sometimes.
It was thus said that the Great Bill Gunshannon via cctalk once stated:
> On 1/29/21 4:12 PM, Will Cooke via cctalk wrote:
> >
> >>On 01/29/2021 2:58 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> >>
> >
> >>'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error, and
> >>which the compiler doesn't
On 1/30/21 1:57 PM, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
On 30/01/2021 12:45, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
On 1/29/21 4:25 PM, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
On 01/29/21 15:58, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote (in part):
'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error,
and which
On 1/30/21 1:38 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> Actually, that was Chuck who said that "there be monsters" when
> languages use whitespace rather than punctuation to denote boundaries.
And then there's "make", where a hard tab must be used for indentation,
unless it's a recipe, then spaces
On 1/30/21 9:52 AM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
On 1/29/21 10:03 PM, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
And unfortunately some industries it is prohibited. Those industries
*require* conformance to MISRA, CERT-C, ISO-26262 and others. There is
*no* choice since the code has to be audited
On 30/01/2021 12:45, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
On 1/29/21 4:25 PM, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
On 01/29/21 15:58, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote (in part):
'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error,
and which the compiler doesn't catch:
if (x = 3) . . .  /*
> On 01/30/2021 11:50 AM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>
> On 1/29/21 6:08 PM, Sean Conner via cctalk wrote:
> > It was thus said that the Great Will Cooke via cctalk once stated:
> > >
> >>> On 01/29/2021 4:42 PM David Barto via cctalk
> >>> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Whenever I start a
On 1/29/21 9:19 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
On 1/29/21 5:55 PM, dwight via cctalk wrote:
My problem with words such as DAA is that I constantly have to look them up to
see exactly what they actually do. Finding alternate uses it all about knowing
what they actually do. I know what they
On 1/29/21 10:03 PM, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
>
> And unfortunately some industries it is prohibited. Those industries
> *require* conformance to MISRA, CERT-C, ISO-26262 and others. There is
> *no* choice since the code has to be audited and compliance is *not*
> optional.
Just an
On 1/29/21 6:08 PM, Sean Conner via cctalk wrote:
It was thus said that the Great Will Cooke via cctalk once stated:
On 01/29/2021 4:42 PM David Barto via cctalk wrote:
Whenever I start a new job the first thing I do today is enable -Werror;
all warnings are errors. And I’ll fix every
> On 01/30/2021 11:42 AM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
> > Modern Visual Studio and GCC both flag the "=" in a condition, I believe.
> > But if you're shipping code with 260+ warnings, who would see one more.
> And the problem here is really quite plain and simple.
> Why are you
On 1/29/21 4:25 PM, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
On 01/29/21 15:58, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote (in part):
'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error,
and which the compiler doesn't catch:
if (x = 3) . . . /* sets x to 3 and gives TRUE for the condition */
I imagine
On 1/29/21 4:12 PM, Will Cooke via cctalk wrote:
On 01/29/2021 2:58 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error, and
which the compiler doesn't catch:
if (x = 3) . . . /* sets x to 3 and gives TRUE for the condition */
I imagine that
On 1/29/21 2:20 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
BTW, I don't really know Hebrew but doesn't it still write math LTR?
I know they write numbers that way.
CAREFUL.
We don't need another BIG-endian/little-endian debate!
(when a 16 bit number
> On Jan 29, 2021, at 8:27 PM, dwight via cctalk wrote:
>
> [EXTERNAL EMAIL]
>
> If we'd thought about it we could count to 1023 on our fingers.
> Dwight
My kids actually do that (because I did think about it when they were growing
up). And not just to impress me, I was watching the elder
detective skills, guess
which product...]
From: "cctalk"
To: "cctalk"
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 6:57:28 PM
Subject: Re: APL\360
It was thus said that the Great Norman Jaffe via cctalk once stated:
>
> It happened to me as well - I found hundreds of warnings
On 1/29/21 4:32 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
if ( !(myfile = fopen( filename, "r"))
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
In a lot of industry standard coding practices (MISRA, CERT-C) that
type of statement is prohibited and *will* result in an error being
reported by
It was thus said that the Great Norman Jaffe via cctalk once stated:
>
> It happened to me as well - I found hundreds of warnings in the code and,
> after getting permission to address them, I was fired
Wait ... you got *permission* and were still *fired*? Have I just been
fortunate in where
It was thus said that the Great Fred Cisin via cctalk once stated:
> >Whenever I start a new job the first thing I do today is enable
> >-Werror; all warnings are errors. And I’ll fix every one. Even
> >when everyone claims that “These are not a problem”. Before
> >that existed, I’d do the same
> On 01/29/2021 7:55 PM dwight via cctalk wrote:
>
>
> I constantly see people claiming how much better decimal is than the English
> system of meassurment. I don't really think that much of the decimal number
> system. If we'd only been born with 8 fingers on each hand, computers would
>
On Sat, 30 Jan 2021, dwight via cctalk wrote:
If we'd thought about it we could count to 1023 on our fingers.
If the more dominant/aggressive of our ancestors had come from warmer
climates where feet don't stink too much to expose in public, then we
could have had 20 binary digits.
On 1/29/21 4:13 PM, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
> In a lot of industry standard coding practices (MISRA, CERT-C) that type
> of statement is prohibited and *will* result in an error being reported
> by the checker/scanner.
>
> The if statement in your example has at least 2 errors from
If we'd thought about it we could count to 1023 on our fingers.
Dwight
From: cctalk on behalf of Chuck Guzis via
cctalk
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 6:19 PM
To: dwight via cctalk
Subject: Re: APL\360
On 1/29/21 5:55 PM, dwight via cctalk wrote:
>
On 1/29/21 5:55 PM, dwight via cctalk wrote:
> My problem with words such as DAA is that I constantly have to look them up
> to see exactly what they actually do. Finding alternate uses it all about
> knowing what they actually do. I know what they were put there for ( to keep
> banker happy ).
.
Dwight
From: cctalk on behalf of Fred Cisin via cctalk
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 4:32 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: APL\360
>>> if ( !(myfile = fopen( filename, "r"))
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Guy S
if ( !(myfile = fopen( filename, "r"))
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
In a lot of industry standard coding practices (MISRA, CERT-C) that type of
statement is prohibited and *will* result in an error being reported by the
checker/scanner.
The if statement in your example
On 30/01/2021 00:13, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
In a lot of industry standard coding practices (MISRA, CERT-C) that
type of statement is prohibited and *will* result in an error being
reported by the checker/scanner.
The if statement in your example has at least 2 errors from MISRA's
In a lot of industry standard coding practices (MISRA, CERT-C) that type
of statement is prohibited and *will* result in an error being reported
by the checker/scanner.
The if statement in your example has at least 2 errors from MISRA's
perspective:
* assignment within a conditional
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
In the past (and occasionally today, I use the following construct:
FILE *myfile;
if ( !(myfile = fopen( filename, "r"))
{
fprintf( stderr, "Couldn\'t open %s - exiting\n", filename);
exit (1);
}
Yes, it only saves a line, but neatly
In the past (and occasionally today, I use the following construct:
FILE *myfile;
if ( !(myfile = fopen( filename, "r"))
{
fprintf( stderr, "Couldn\'t open %s - exiting\n", filename);
exit (1);
}
Yes, it only saves a line, but neatly describes what's being done.
--Chuck
Whenever I start a new job the first thing I do today is enable
-Werror; all warnings are errors. And I’ll fix every one. Even
when everyone claims that “These are not a problem”. Before
that existed, I’d do the same with lint, and FlexeLint when I
could get it.
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021,
On 1/29/2021 1:58 PM, Fred Cisin wrote:
You COULD design a language around your favorite pseudo-code structures
I did that already, since I can not find a easy to port C compiler
with structures, and a small memory footprint like 64Kb. I found LCC 3.x
off a old CD rom archive, but I can't
to have their product on any system that I have involvement with...
From: "cctalk"
To: "cctalk"
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 3:08:28 PM
Subject: Re: APL\360
It was thus said that the Great Will Cooke via cctalk once stated:
>
> > On 01/29/2021 4:42 PM
> On 01/29/2021 5:08 PM Sean Conner via cctalk wrote:
>
> >
> WHY? Why would you get fired for fixing warnings? Would it make some
> manager upstream look bad or something?
>
> -spc
Because the code was so fragile and "worked" that making the code "correct" was
likely to break it.
"A
It was thus said that the Great Will Cooke via cctalk once stated:
>
> > On 01/29/2021 4:42 PM David Barto via cctalk wrote:
>
> > Whenever I start a new job the first thing I do today is enable -Werror;
> > all warnings are errors. And I’ll fix every one. Even when everyone
> > claims that
> On 01/29/2021 4:42 PM David Barto via cctalk wrote:
>
> Whenever I start a new job the first thing I do today is enable -Werror; all
> warnings are errors. And I’ll fix every one. Even when everyone claims that
> “These are not a problem”. Before that existed, I’d do the same with lint,
> On Jan 29, 2021, at 2:08 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, wrco...@wrcooke.net wrote:
>> Modern Visual Studio and GCC both flag the "=" in a condition, I believe.
>> But if you're shipping code with 260+ warnings, who would see one more.
>
> In some cases, it
'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error, and
which the compiler doesn't catch:
if (x = 3) . . . /* sets x to 3 and gives TRUE for the condition */
I imagine that there are probably some pre-processors that would return a
WARNING for it.
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021,
On 01/29/21 15:58, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote (in part):
'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error,
and which the compiler doesn't catch:
if (x = 3) . . . /* sets x to 3 and gives TRUE for the condition */
I imagine that there are probably some pre-processors that
On 1/29/21 12:58 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
>>> Without OTHER changes in parsing arithmetic expressions, that may or
> I like indentation, and demanded it from my students.
> while (k)
> { if (foo)
> { ..do this thing
> ..do that thing
> }
> else
> { ..something
Early versions of BASIC had a keyword "LET". LET X = 3 is devoid of
most of the ambiguity, and LET 3 = X is much less likely to be
attempted. 'Course, changing the values of constants opens up some
strange possibilities!
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
SUBROUTINE FOO(X)
On 1/29/21 11:40 AM, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
> On 29/01/2021 14:20, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
>> We don't need another BIG-endian/little-endian debate!
>> (when a 16 bit number is stored in bytes, does the high order byte
>> come first, or the low order byte?) (cf. intel V Motorola)
>
> On 01/29/2021 2:58 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
>
> '=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error, and
> which the compiler doesn't catch:
> if (x = 3) . . . /* sets x to 3 and gives TRUE for the condition */
> I imagine that there are probably some pre-processors
On 1/29/21 11:59 AM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> Early versions of BASIC had a keyword "LET". LET X = 3 is devoid of
> most of the ambiguity, and LET 3 = X is much less likely to be
> attempted. 'Course, changing the values of constants opens up some
> strange possibilities!
SUBROUTINE
Without OTHER changes in parsing arithmetic expressions, that may or may
not be warranted, just replacing the '=' being used for assignment with an
arrow ELIMINATED that particular confusion. Well, mostly. You can't use
a right pointing arrow to fix 3 = X
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, ben via cctalk
On 1/29/21 12:21 PM, ben via cctalk wrote:
On 1/29/2021 12:59 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
Without OTHER changes in parsing arithmetic expressions, that may or
may not be warranted, just replacing the '=' being used for
assignment with an arrow ELIMINATED that particular confusion.
On 1/29/2021 12:59 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
Without OTHER changes in parsing arithmetic expressions, that may or may
not be warranted, just replacing the '=' being used for assignment with
an arrow ELIMINATED that particular confusion. Well, mostly. You can't
use a right pointing
We don't need another BIG-endian/little-endian debate!
(when a 16 bit number is stored in bytes, does the high order byte come
first, or the low order byte?) (cf. intel V Motorola)
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
Amen to that (but did it not originate with DEC vs. IBM?)
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
Well, part of the confusion lies in the difference of "=" in mathematics
indicating a property or state, as opposed to computer languages using
it as an operator. It's a subtle distinction, but important.
D = 4AC in mathematics establishes a
On 1/29/2021 8:19 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 13:11, Peter Corlett via cctalk
wrote:
It is *also* the use of symbols. Firstly, some people are just symbol-blind
and prefer stuff spelled out in words. It's just how brains are wired.
Agreed. I submit this is also
On 29/01/2021 14:20, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
We don't need another BIG-endian/little-endian debate!
(when a 16 bit number is stored in bytes, does the high order byte
come first, or the low order byte?) (cf. intel V Motorola)
Amen to that (but did it not originate with DEC vs. IBM?)
N.
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
BTW, I don't really know Hebrew but doesn't it still write math LTR? I know
they write numbers that way.
CAREFUL.
We don't need another BIG-endian/little-endian debate!
(when a 16 bit number is stored in bytes, does the high order byte come
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 11:21:11AM -0500, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> In 1999, a fellow student in a UML course worked for a large information
> company (Reuters, I think?) and told me that they had embarked on an
> expensive s/w conversion project. Their back-end systems were
> On Jan 29, 2021, at 12:12 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On 1/29/21 6:27 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>
>> True, although right to left is not a natural way to read mathematical
>> formulas. The reason APL uses right to left is that the designers
>> apparently were
On Friday, January 29, 2021, 10:19:54 AM EST, Liam Proven via cctalk
wrote:
>On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 13:11, Peter Corlett via cctalk
>wrote:
>>
>> It is *also* the use of symbols. Firstly, some people are just symbol-blind
>> and prefer stuff spelled out in words. It's just how brains are
On 1/29/21 6:27 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
> True, although right to left is not a natural way to read mathematical
> formulas. The reason APL uses right to left is that the designers apparently
> were unwilling to change the direction of the assignment operator, so
> everything else
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 13:11, Peter Corlett via cctalk
wrote:
>
> It is *also* the use of symbols. Firstly, some people are just symbol-blind
> and prefer stuff spelled out in words. It's just how brains are wired.
Agreed. I submit this is also why some people find Lisp (and perhaps
Forth and
On 1/29/21 7:27 AM, Gavin Scott via cctalk wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 6:11 AM Peter Corlett via cctalk
wrote:
Secondly, beyond BODMAS, the meaning and precedence of random symbols is
unclear to casual readers.
An issue that plagues other operator-rich languages, but not APL since
APL
> On Jan 29, 2021, at 7:27 AM, Gavin Scott via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 6:11 AM Peter Corlett via cctalk
> wrote:
>> Secondly, beyond BODMAS, the meaning and precedence of random symbols is
>> unclear to casual readers.
>
> An issue that plagues other operator-rich
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 6:11 AM Peter Corlett via cctalk
wrote:
> Secondly, beyond BODMAS, the meaning and precedence of random symbols is
> unclear to casual readers.
An issue that plagues other operator-rich languages, but not APL since
APL follows a strict right-to-left evaluation order for
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 07:43:13PM -0800, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> APL was difficult for those used to traditional programming languages, not
> primarily because of the character set, but because it's basically a
> vector/matrix programming language.
It is *also* the use of symbols.
On 1/20/2021 10:16 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
Learning many different paradigms makes it easier to and more
likely that you will choose the right tool for the job. In
the world of general purpose languages all you have is a hammer
and so all tasks look like nails.
bill
I don't
On 1/20/21 1:01 AM, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 4:41 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk
wrote:
A viewpoint opposed to mine:
"The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be
regarded as a criminal offense." - Edsger Dijkstra
As much as I generally
On 1/19/21 10:01 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote:
> Learning and using any programming language will cause some language
> specific habits to become ingrained, and you may have to "unlearn" some
> when you learn a new language. That doesn't necessarily make either
> language bad.
>
Hence PL/I.
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 4:41 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk
wrote:
> A viewpoint opposed to mine:
> "The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be
> regarded as a criminal offense." - Edsger Dijkstra
>
As much as I generally highly respect Dijkstra, I agree with Fred, not
On 01/15/2021 07:18 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
One measure I've used is that, out of 40 or so languages I
know, with only two have I gone from "no knowledge" to
"able to write a substantial program" in one week. One was
Pascal (in university -- computer course code generator).
I used
On 01/15/2021 05:07 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
On 1/15/21 3:11 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
It's also worth noting that (ostensibly) the first complete
microcomputer system (keyboard, printer, storage) was the
MCM/70, using
an 8008 implementing APL (not BASIC!).
I had to see
On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 at 17:50, Liam Proven wrote:
> So I resubbed online and now I get it again. providing that warm
> comforting sensation of intellects vast and cool, as immeasurably
> superior to my own as mine is to that of the transient creatures that
> swarm and multiply in a drop of water.
> On Jan 15, 2021, at 7:33 PM, Norman Jaffe via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> I have found that the ideal combination of languages to learn early are APL,
> Simula, LISP and Smalltalk.
> I was lucky enough to have started programming when that was possible.
Interesting.
My first was ALGOL 60.
> On Jan 15, 2021, at 6:41 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>>> There are some flaws in our educational system.
>>> Such as directing learning so rigidly that students are discouraged from
>>> exploring.
>
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2021, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
>> Even worse when they
I have found that the ideal combination of languages to learn early are APL,
Simula, LISP and Smalltalk.
I was lucky enough to have started programming when that was possible.
From: "cctalk"
To: "cctalk"
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 4:13:26 PM
Subject: Re: APL\360
At least Edsger Dijkstra thought that APL had been "carried through to
perfection"! "language of the future" for our programming techniques!
creates a new generation of coders"!
Oh, wait. Here's the context:
"APL is a mistake, carried through to perfection. It is the language of
the future
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
