On Tue, 4 Dec 2018, Liam Proven wrote:
> > I don't know if the unreal mode has been retained in the x86 architecture
> > to this day; as I noted above it was not officially supported. But then
> > some originally undocumented x86 features, such as the second byte of AAD
> > and AAM instructions
On Sat, 1 Dec 2018 at 02:00, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> Be assured there were enough IBM PC clones running DOS around from 1989
> onwards for this stuff to matter,
OK, fair enough. Thanks for the info!
> and hardly anyone switched to MS Windows
> before version 95 (running Windows 3.0 with
On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 at 15:02, Maciej W. Rozycki via cctalk
wrote:
> I don't know if the unreal mode has been retained in the x86 architecture
> to this day; as I noted above it was not officially supported. But then
> some originally undocumented x86 features, such as the second byte of AAD
>
On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> > Well, ATA drives at that time should have already had the capability to
> > remap bad blocks or whole tracks transparently in the firmware, although
>
> Not even IDE.
> Seagate ST4096 (ST506/412 MFM) 80MB formatted, which was still
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 3:28 PM Grant Taylor via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On 11/30/2018 02:33 PM, Jim Manley via cctalk wrote:
> > There's enough slack in the approved offerings that electives can be
> > weighted more toward the technical direction (e.g., user interface and
> >
I found the bad spot and put a SECTORS.BAD file there, and then was OK.
On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
Well, ATA drives at that time should have already had the capability to
remap bad blocks or whole tracks transparently in the firmware, although
Not even IDE.
Seagate ST4096
On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> I found the bad spot and put a SECTORS.BAD file there, and then was OK.
> The Microsoft Beta program wanted cheerleaders, and ABSOLUTELY didn't want any
> negative feedback nor bug reports, and insisted that the OS had no
> responsibility to
On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, Maciej W. Rozycki via cctalk wrote:
Be assured there were enough IBM PC clones running DOS around from 1989
onwards for this stuff to matter, and hardly anyone switched to MS Windows
before version 95 (running Windows 3.0 with the ubiquitous HGC-compatible
graphics adapters
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> > > For example, right now, I am in my office in Křižíkova. I can't
> > > type that name correctly without Unicode characters, because the ANSI
> > > character set doesn't contain enough letters for Czech.
> >
> > Intriguing. Is there an old
On 11/30/2018 03:57 PM, Sean Conner via cctalk wrote:
There are several problems with this. One, how many bits do you set
aside per character? 8? 16? There are potentially an open ended set
of stylings that one might use.
I acknowledge that the idea I shared was incomplete and likely has
It was thus said that the Great Keelan Lightfoot via cctalk once stated:
> > I see no reason that we can't have new control codes to convey new
> > concepts if they are needed.
>
> I disagree with this; from a usability standpoint, control codes are
> problematic. Either the user needs to
On 11/30/2018 02:33 PM, Jim Manley via cctalk wrote:
There's enough slack in the approved offerings that electives can be
weighted more toward the technical direction (e.g., user interface and
experience) or the arts direction (e.g., psychology and history). The idea
was to close the
On 11/30/2018 11:34 AM, Keelan Lightfoot via cctalk wrote:
Thanks!
:-)
Both. In the beginning we were content, because the keyboard was well
suited to the capabilities of the technology available at the time it was
invented. We didn't see a better way, because when compared to using a pen
> Back on topic, the tools exist, but they are often seen as toys and
> not serious software
> development tools. Are we at the point where the compiler for a visual
> programming
> language is written in the visual programming language?
>
> - Keelan
>
Hi Keelan,
I was going to mention this
> Welcome. :-)
Thanks!
> Do you think that we stopped enhancing the user input experience more
> because we were content with what we had or because we didn't see a
> better way to do what we wanted to do?
Both. In the beginning we were content, because the keyboard was well
suited to the
Some computing economics history:
I'm an engineer and scientist by both education and experience, and one
major difference between the disciplines is that engineers are required to
pass coursework and demonstrate proficiency in economics. That's because
we need to deliver things that actually do
On Wed, 28 Nov 2018 at 09:27, Paul Koning via cctalk
wrote:
> I learned it about 15 years ago (OpenAPL, running on a Solaris workstation
> with a modified Xterm that handled the APL characters). Nice. It made a
> handy tool for some cryptanalysis programs I needed to write.
>
I am interested
> On Nov 27, 2018, at 9:23 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>>> I have long wondered if there are computer languages that aren't rooted
>>> in English / ASCII. I feel like it's rather pompous to assume that all
>>> programming languages are rooted in English / ASCII. I would hope that
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 at 20:47, Grant Taylor via cctalk
wrote:
>
> I don't think that HTML can reproduce fixed page layout like PostScript
> and PDF can. It can make a close approximation. But I don't think HTML
> can get there. Nor do I think it should.
There are a wider panoply of options to
On Wed, 28 Nov 2018 at 08:05, Fred Cisin via cctalk
wrote:
>
> He also created the Canon Cat.
>
> His idea of a user interface included that the program should KNOW
> (assume) what the user wanted to do.
One of my heroes.
I've never used a Cat or his other software UIs, but the demos I've
seen
Why not a language even more self-documenting than COBOL, wherein the main
body is text, and special markers to identify the CODE that corresponds?
On Wed, 28 Nov 2018, Sean Conner wrote:
In the book _Programmers at Work_ there's a picture of a program Jef
Raskin [1] wrote that basically
On 11/27/2018 9:11 PM, Sean Conner via cctalk wrote
But I can still load and read circa-1968-plain-text files without issue,
on a computer that didn't even exist at the time, using tools that didn't
exist at the time. The same can't be said for a circa-1988-Microsoft-word
file. It requires
It was thus said that the Great Fred Cisin via cctalk once stated:
>
> >>I like the C comment example; Why do I need to call out a comment with
> >>a special sequence of letters? Why can't a comment exist as a comment?
>
> Why not a language even more self-documenting than COBOL, wherein the main
It was thus said that the Great Keelan Lightfoot via cctalk once stated:
> I'm a bit dense for weighing in on this as my first post, but what the heck.
>
> Our problem isn't ASCII or Unicode, our problem is how we use computers.
>
> Going back in time a bit, the first keyboards only recorded
On 11/27/18 6:23 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> I love the use of an arrow for assignment. In teaching, a student's
> FIRST encounter with programming can be daunting. Use of an equal sign
> immediately runs up against the long in-grained concept of commutative
> equality. You would be
It was thus said that the Great Grant Taylor via cctalk once stated:
> On 11/27/2018 04:43 PM, Keelan Lightfoot via cctalk wrote:
> >
> >Unpopular opinion time: Markup languages are a kludge, relying on plain
> >text to describe higher level concepts.
>
> I agree that markup languages are a
I have long wondered if there are computer languages that aren't rooted
in English / ASCII. I feel like it's rather pompous to assume that all
programming languages are rooted in English / ASCII. I would hope that
there are programming languages that are more specific to the region of
the world
On 2018-11-27 8:33 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
> ...
>> Bold or italic or underlined text shouldn't be a second class concept,
>> they have meaning that can be lost when text is conveyed in
>> circa-1868-plain-text. I've read many letters that predate the
>> invention of the typewriter,
On 11/27/2018 04:43 PM, Keelan Lightfoot via cctalk wrote:
I'm a bit dense for weighing in on this as my first post, but what
the heck.
Welcome. :-)
Our problem isn't ASCII or Unicode, our problem is how we use computers.
Okay.
Going back in time a bit, the first keyboards only recorded
I'm a bit dense for weighing in on this as my first post, but what the heck.
Our problem isn't ASCII or Unicode, our problem is how we use computers.
Going back in time a bit, the first keyboards only recorded letters
and spaces, even line breaks required manual intervention. As things
On 11/27/2018 12:47 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
ASCII is a common way of encoding characters and control codes in the
same binary pattern.
File formats are what collections of ASCII characters / control codes
mean / do.
It also was designed for hard copy. Over strikes don't work
> I have long wondered if there are computer languages that aren't rooted
> in English / ASCII. I feel like it's rather pompous to assume that all
> programming languages are rooted in English / ASCII. I would hope that
> there are programming languages that are more specific to the region of
>
On 11/27/2018 03:05 AM, Guy Dunphy wrote:
It was a core of the underlying philosophy, that html would NOT allow any
kind of fixed formatting. The reasoning was that it could be displayed
on any kind of system, so had to be free-format and quite abstract.
That's one of the reasons that I like
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 01:21:52AM +1100, Guy Dunphy via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> Oh yes, tell me about the html 'there is no such thing as hard formatting and
> you can't have any even when you want it' concept. Thank you Tim Berners Lee.
Sure you can! Pick one of:
a) If you're not using HTML
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 at 15:21, Guy Dunphy via cctalk
wrote:
> Defects in the ASCII code table. This was a great improvement at the time,
> but fails to implement several utterly essential concepts. The lack of these
> concepts in the character coding scheme underlying virtually all information
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 at 23:39, Christian Gauger-Cosgrove
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 at 03:44, Liam Proven via cctalk
> wrote:
> > If it's in Roman, Cyrillic, or Greek, they're alphabets, so it's a letter.
> >
> Correct, Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic are alphabets, so each
> letter/character can
Oh yes, tell me about the html 'there is no such thing as hard formatting
and you can't have any even when you want it' concept. Thank you Tim
Berners Lee.
I've not delved too deeply into the lack of hard formatting in HTML.
The HTML . . . tag helps a bit.
Before I found THAT, I was
On 11/26/18 7:21 AM, Guy Dunphy wrote:
I was speaking poetically. Perhaps "the mail software he uses was written
by morons" is clearer.
;-)
Oh yes, tell me about the html 'there is no such thing
as hard formatting and you can't have any even when
you want it' concept. Thank you Tim Berners
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018, Guy Dunphy via cctalk wrote:
Hmm... the problem is it's intended to be serious, but is still far from
exposure-ready.
So if I talk about it now, I risk having specific terms I've coined in the doco
(including
the project name) getting meme-jammed or trademarked by others.
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 at 03:44, Liam Proven via cctalk
wrote:
> If it's in Roman, Cyrillic, or Greek, they're alphabets, so it's a letter.
>
Correct, Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic are alphabets, so each
letter/character can be a consonant or vowel.
> I can't read Arabic or Hebrew but I believe
On 11/26/2018 9:26 AM, Charles Anthony via cctalk wrote:
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 4:28 AM Peter Corlett via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 07:59:13PM -0800, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
[...]
Alas, "current" computers use 8, 16, 32. They totally fail to
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 4:28 AM Peter Corlett via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 07:59:13PM -0800, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> [...]
> > Alas, "current" computers use 8, 16, 32. They totally fail to understand
> the
> > intrinsic benefits of 9, 12, 18, 24, and
At 10:52 PM 25/11/2018 -0700, you wrote:
>> Then adds a plain ASCII space 0x20 just to be sure.
>
>I don't think it's adding a plain ASCII space 0x20 just to be sure.
>Looking at the source of the message, I see =C2=A0, which is the UTF-8
>representation followed by the space. My MUA that
On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 03:06:29PM -0800, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> I routinely get Turkish and Greek spam in my mailbox--and I've gotten
> Cyrillic-alphabet stuff as well.
I had started to get slightly paranoid about the fact that there was a sudden
increase in Dutch-language spam
On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 07:59:13PM -0800, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> Alas, "current" computers use 8, 16, 32. They totally fail to understand the
> intrinsic benefits of 9, 12, 18, 24, and 36 bits.
Oh go on then, I'm curious. What are the benefits? Is it just that there are
useful prime
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 at 01:00, Grant Taylor via cctalk
wrote:
>
> If they are not seen as separate letters, then do their meaning's
> change? Or is the different accent more for pronunciation?
No, mainly, it changes alphabetical order and it makes asking questions tricky.
I see š as an
Not to beat a dead horse, but I ran across "Â Â Â " in a text file when
read via a web browser this evening and wanted to share my findings as
they seemed timely.
On 11/22/18 5:55 PM, Guy Dunphy via cctalk wrote:
Anyway, I was wondering how Ed's emails (and sometimes others elsewhere)
Therefore, for use with current computers, 32 bits would be needed.
Some games can be played with mixing sizes by doing things like setting
high bit, for 128 7 bit characters plus 32768 15 bit characters, and
2147483648 31 bit characters.
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, ben via cctalk wrote:
REAL
On 11/25/2018 6:34 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Tomasz Rola via cctalk wrote:
To supply this train of thought with some numbers:
- my copy of Common Lisp HyperSpec claims 978 symbols (i.e. words) on
its alphabetical index; many words have modifiers (a.k.a. keyword
ASL is quite different than English... you can sign in English or you can
sign in ASL The ASL has a different sentence structure. When I was first
learning about the Deaf Teletype revolution (We have a collection of a
diverse group of TTY both mechanical and CRT and portable
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Tomasz Rola via cctalk wrote:
To supply this train of thought with some numbers:
- my copy of Common Lisp HyperSpec claims 978 symbols (i.e. words) on
its alphabetical index; many words have modifiers (a.k.a. keyword
options, with default values) which increases the
On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 04:46:50PM -0800, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> Is FORTRAN considered modern enough?
[...]
> What about APL? Although its structure is fairly straight-forward,
> it does, indeed, have a unique character set.
To supply this train of thought with some numbers:
- my
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Frank McConnell via cctalk wrote:
I have been told that in the 1960s taking a course in FORTRAN
programming fulfilled the foreign language requirement at UC Berkeley.
Not currently, and I have some doubt about then.
But, there are conflicting staatements.
One section
We have a tendency to be remarkably ethnocentric. When you apply for a
job, do you send them a copy of your RESUME?
There is an exit on 280 for "La Canada" road.
For most European languages (I did say MOST), an 8 bit extended ASCII
could be adequate.
"Recently" (1981), I was disappointed in
On 11/25/18 3:53 PM, Liam Proven wrote:
It's been enlightening!
:-)
Some I was ready for.
E.g. In French or Spanish, both of which I can speak to some extent,
letters like á or ó are not seen as separate letters: French would call
them a-acute, an a with an acute accent. Ç is a c with a
On Nov 25, 2018, at 15:44, Sean Conner wrote:
> I even heard of a high school in Tennessee who said computer languages
> fulfill the "foreign language requirements" ... who'da thunk?
I have been told that in the 1960s taking a course in FORTRAN programming
fulfilled the foreign language
It was thus said that the Great Bill Gunshannon via cctalk once stated:
>
> On 11/25/18 5:42 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
> > On 11/23/18 5:52 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
> >> Worse than that, it's *American* ignorance and cultural snobbery
> >> which also affects various
On 11/25/18 3:51 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
Q. What do you call someone who speaks three languages?
A. Trilingual.
Q. What do you call someone who speaks two languages?
A. Bilingual.
Q. What do you call someone who speaks one language?
A. American.
Monolingual.
OK, it's a
On 11/25/18 6:06 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
> On 11/25/18 2:53 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
>> On Sun, 25 Nov 2018 at 23:42, Grant Taylor via cctalk
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I bet you see all sorts of things that I'm ignorant of.
>> It's been enlightening!
> I routinely get Turkish and Greek
On 11/25/18 2:53 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2018 at 23:42, Grant Taylor via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>> I bet you see all sorts of things that I'm ignorant of.
>
> It's been enlightening!
I routinely get Turkish and Greek spam in my mailbox--and I've gotten
Cyrillic-alphabet
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018 at 23:42, Grant Taylor via cctalk
wrote:
> I bet you see all sorts of things that I'm ignorant of.
It's been enlightening!
Some I was ready for.
E.g. In French or Spanish, both of which I can speak to some extent,
letters like á or ó are not seen as separate letters:
On 11/25/18 5:42 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
> On 11/23/18 5:52 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
>> Worse than that, it's *American* ignorance and cultural snobbery
>> which also affects various English-speaking countries.
>
> Please do not ascribe such ignorance with such a broad
On 11/23/18 11:27 AM, Tomasz Rola via cctalk wrote:
Well, that was low hanging fruit. But if he indeed turns it off and the
problem is not gone, that will be a bit of puzzle. Will require some way
to compare mailboxes in search of pattern in missing emails... Which may
or may not be obvious...
On 11/23/18 4:12 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
That's English-language cultural snobbery.
I don't think I'd go that far.
I'd suspect it's an unfortunate false positive of a spam filtering
technique that Guy uses.
Does the technique have some negative side effects? Sure.
Are said side
On 11/23/18 5:52 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
Worse than that, it's *American* ignorance and cultural snobbery which
also affects various English-speaking countries.
Please do not ascribe such ignorance with such a broad brush, at least
not without qualifiers that account for people
At 07:27 PM 23/11/2018 +0100, you wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 07:01:17PM +0100, Liam Proven wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Nov 2018 at 18:54, Tomasz Rola via cctalk
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Turn off trashing mails with Unicode in Subject and see if this solves
>> > a problem?
>>
>> *Loud laughter in the
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 11:44:23PM +0100, Tomasz Rola wrote:
[...]
> Just my wet phantasies about how such things work or might work. It
> only requires one lousy admin to make it true, or a good one fired and
> never to be heard from again.
>
> Perhaps asking your ISP could give you some clues.
On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 08:56:09AM +1100, Guy Dunphy wrote:
> Resend, just in case that screen-cap image attachment fails. It is also here:
> http://everist.org/6F2a/cctalk_rcvd.png
>
> >Will require
> >some way to compare mailboxes in search of pattern in missing
> >emails... Which may or may
Resend, just in case that screen-cap image attachment fails. It is also here:
http://everist.org/6F2a/cctalk_rcvd.png
>Will require
>some way to compare mailboxes in search of pattern in missing
>emails... Which may or may not be obvious... which will lead to more
>puzzles... oy maybe I should
At 06:54 PM 23/11/2018 +0100, you wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 11:55:18AM +1100, Guy Dunphy via cctalk wrote:
>[...]
>>
>> I see them because I'm using an old email client - Eudora 3 (1997.)
>> I stick with this specifically _because_ it doesn't understand UTF-8
>> or any other non-ASCII
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 07:01:17PM +0100, Liam Proven wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Nov 2018 at 18:54, Tomasz Rola via cctalk
> wrote:
> >
> > Turn off trashing mails with Unicode in Subject and see if this solves
> > a problem?
>
> *Loud laughter in the office*
>
> Well _played_, sir!
Well, that was
On Fri, 23 Nov 2018 at 18:54, Tomasz Rola via cctalk
wrote:
>
> Turn off trashing mails with Unicode in Subject and see if this solves
> a problem?
*Loud laughter in the office*
Well _played_, sir!
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk - Google
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 11:55:18AM +1100, Guy Dunphy via cctalk wrote:
[...]
>
> I see them because I'm using an old email client - Eudora 3 (1997.)
> I stick with this specifically _because_ it doesn't understand UTF-8
> or any other non-ASCII coding, especially in the header, and hence
> simply
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 12:12:32PM +0100, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Nov 2018 at 01:55, Guy Dunphy via cctalk
> wrote:
[...]
>> Also I have it configured to dust-bin any incomimg mail containing UTF-8
>> chars in the Subject header. Avoids a lot of time-wasting.
> That's
On Fri, 23 Nov 2018 at 01:55, Guy Dunphy via cctalk
wrote:
> Also I have it configured to
> dust-bin any incomimg mail containing UTF-8 chars in the Subject header.
> Avoids a lot of time-wasting.
That's English-language cultural snobbery. I'm a native Anglophone but
I live in a non-English
At 10:33 PM 21/11/2018 -0500, ED SHARPE wrote:
>if I type an extra space I am sure every one sees it. but the chars not
>everyone sees them.
>what I do figure us the older email programs are not accepting of all charter
>sets? ( dunno if I am using the right term)
>
>Sent from AOL Mobile Mail
76 matches
Mail list logo
