| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417153 is a reply to message #417148] |
Fri, 28 October 2022 14:52   |
D.J.
Messages: 821
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 11:30:50 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 28/10/2022 09:44, Charles Richmond wrote:
>> On 8/1/2022 1:53 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On 2022-08-01, Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 01 Aug 2022 09:45:53 -0500, D.J. wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > I've never seen an 8" floppy drive anywhere.
>>>>
>>>> They are rarer than hen's teeth, these days.
>>>>
>>>> My first encounter with an 8" floppy disk drive was in loading
>>>> the microcode into a S/370-30 mainframe. Later, when I acquired
>>>> my first home computer (a Cromemco Z2) I loaded CP/M from 8"
>>>> disks on my dual-drive Persci voice-coil floppy disk drive.
>>>
>>> I still have my IMSAI with its two 8-inch floppy drives.
>>> Unfortunately, although it powers up and the CPU appears
>>> OK, it won't boot. I suspect that the boot ROM has suffered
>>> bit rot. I'll need to find the listing of the ROM's contents
>>> and a 2708 programmer...
>>>
>>
>> If the boot ROM is socketed, you might pull it out/push it in the socket
>> a few times. Sometimes the "legs" are a bit corroded. ISTM I read
>> somewhere that applying power to the chip for a while *might* allow the
>> memory cells to re-generate... something like an electrolytic capacitor
>> can do. YMMV.
>>
> I occasionally watch 'Adrians digital basement' on you tube for idle
> nostalgic amusement, he restores old 8 /16 bit machines and drives.
>
> It appears there are archive sites for old ROM code, donated by people
> who still care.
>
> And various hacks exist to make old rom emulators using new(er) Eproms,
> EAROMS and even probably SD cards
There are SD card setups that can hold lots of Amiga computer
floppies. Youtube videos talk about it. I don't have a link.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417156 is a reply to message #417139] |
Fri, 28 October 2022 18:16 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2022-10-28, Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> Charlie Gibbs: Reminds me of your story about an existing program that
> read in *all* the large number of data lines, then processed the lines,
> and only then sent all of it to the line printer. You re-wrote the code
> to read a card, process that one item and immediately send the result to
> the printer. This took less code and less memory for processing.
>
> As soon as your program started, the printer began printing results.
> And your cow-orkers thought the program must be broken... cause it never
> acted like that before!!!
The program built a summary table in memory, then sorted the whole thing
using a bubble sort, which kept the CPU churning for 60 seconds before
the summary could be printed. I changed it to an insertion sort, so
the table remained in sequence at all times.
It was fun to watch the operator's face...
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417157 is a reply to message #417147] |
Fri, 28 October 2022 18:17 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2022-10-28, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 28/10/2022 09:09, Charles Richmond wrote:
>
>> On 7/31/2022 9:05 PM, John Levine wrote:
>>
>>> It appears that Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> said:
>>>
>>>> I think Lynn might weigh in on this, but I believe APL was used to
>>>> define S/360 architecture.
>>>
>>> The 1964 issue of the IBM Systems Journal which was all about S/360
>>> included a description of the architecture in a version of APL.
>>>
>>> Shortly after that the started turning APL from a paper lanaguage into
>>> one that could run on a computer.
>>
>> The main APL folk who created the code (Ken Iverson and Adin Falkoff)
>> wrote an intro document for APL. In the preface, Iverson said he tried
>> to make the intro "perspicacious"... (that word means simple and
>> straightforward...)
>
> No, it doesn't mean that. It means quick witted and discerning. 'sharp'
> is a colloquial equivalent
>
> By your context Iverson was using a word whose meaning he didn't
> understand either.
>
> "Perspicacious" applies to an active intelligence, not a document.
Maybe you need to be perspicacious to understand it.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417158 is a reply to message #417143] |
Fri, 28 October 2022 18:17 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2022-10-28, Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 02:20:00 -0500, Charles Richmond wrote:
>
>> On 7/25/2022 5:52 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> A sufficiently determined programmer can write unreadable code in any
>>> language. Convoluted code with no comments is even worse.
>>> Convoluted code with outdated, incorrect comments is worse still.
>>
>> At a PPoE, we received FORTRAN code under a tech-sharing agreement with
>> a competitor. A comment atop a convoluted subroutine read:
>>
>> C
>> C IT TOOK ME A LONG TIME TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS
>> C ROUTINE WORKS, AND IT WILL TAKE YOU A LONG TIME
>> C ALSO, CAUSE I AM NOT GOING TO TELL YOU HOW IT
>> C WORKS.
>> C
>>
>> a very helpful comment indeed!
>
> In this context, it is obligatory to link this:
>
> https://gist.github.com/FedericoPonzi/f026ff5c210e738ee03d27 1c8fc0f29b
Unfortunately, a lot of modern obfuscated bloatware is built around
a subtle re-wording of this comment:
You are expected not to understand this.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417164 is a reply to message #415541] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 05:19 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 7/25/2022 3:56 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
> Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>> drb@ihatespam.msu.edu (Dennis Boone) writes:
>>>> SET 0800-INTADJ = IFILE-ACCTBAL * MIR
>>>
>>> More like
>>>
>>> MULTIPLY IFILE-ACCTBAL BY MIR GIVING 0800-INTADJ.
>>>
>>> or
>>>
>>> COMPUTE 0800-INTADJ = IFILE-ACCTBAL * MIR.
>>>
>>> De
>>
>> Or,
>>
>> 1150-CK-TIME.
>> IF KLINGONS > 0
>> ACCEPT WS-TIME FROM TIME
>> MOVE WS-MIN OF WS-TIME TO DS-MIN
>> PERFORM 1145-CK-FLAG THRU 1145-EXIT
>> MOVE WS-SEC OF WS-TIME TO DS-SEC
>> MOVE DS-TABLE TO S-DATE
>> ELSE
>> GO TO 1150-EXIT.
>> COMPUTE T-STORE = DS-DATE - S-DATE.
>> IF T-STORE < 90 AND NOT KLINGONS-ATTACKING
>> MOVE 14 TO MAX-NO
>> COMPUTE W = ((HQ2 - 1) * 14)
>> COMPUTE Z = ((HQ1 - 1) * 14)
>> INSPECT MASTER-TBL REPLACING ALL "K" BY " "
>> MOVE 0 TO RX
>> PERFORM 1170-MOVE-ON-HQ THRU 1170-EXIT
>> VARYING KCTR FROM 1 BY 1 UNTIL KCTR > KLINGONS
>> MOVE 1 TO ATTACK-FLAG
>> PERFORM 5900-TRANS THRU 5900-EXIT
>> IF (Q1 NOT = HQ1 OR Q2 NOT = HQ2)
>> DISPLAY "WARNING - STAR DATE: " S-DATE
>> DISPLAY "SCIENCE OFFICER SPOCK ADVISES"
>> DISPLAY "YOU NAVIGATE TO QUADRANT " HQ1 "," HQ2
>> DISPLAY "TO DEFEND STAR FLEET HEADQUARTERS".
>> IF NOT TOO-LATE
>> MOVE DS-DATE TO WS-DATE.
>> IF S-DATE > WS-DATE AND Q1 = HQ1 AND Q2 = HQ2 AND NOT TOO-LAT
>> - E
>> MOVE 1 TO TOO-LATE-FLAG
>> ADD 230 TO WS-DATE
>> ELSE
>> IF S-DATE > WS-DATE
>> MOVE 1 TO INDICATE-X
>> PERFORM 8200-CK-DONE THRU 8200-EXIT.
>> 1150-EXIT. EXIT.
>>
>> :-)
>>
>
> If I had a programmer working for me who coded like that,be having a talk.
> I HAVE seen code like that, usually written by someone who thought
> programming was beneath him and was bored. Such people were usually
> promoted to management, where they fit right in.
>
COBOL is *great* for a programmer that gets paid "by the lines of code".
There are so *many* ways to very easily pad things out using COBOL...
a programmer will *not* tax their imagination!!! ;-)
--
Charles Richmond
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417165 is a reply to message #415543] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 05:24 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 7/25/2022 4:45 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>> Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>>> drb@ihatespam.msu.edu (Dennis Boone) writes:
>>>> > SET 0800-INTADJ = IFILE-ACCTBAL * MIR
>>>>
>>>> More like
>>>>
>>>> MULTIPLY IFILE-ACCTBAL BY MIR GIVING 0800-INTADJ.
>>>>
>>>> or
>>>>
>>>> COMPUTE 0800-INTADJ = IFILE-ACCTBAL * MIR.
>>>>
>>>> De
>>>
>>> Or,
>>>
>>> 1150-CK-TIME.
>>> IF KLINGONS > 0
>>> ACCEPT WS-TIME FROM TIME
>>> MOVE WS-MIN OF WS-TIME TO DS-MIN
>>> PERFORM 1145-CK-FLAG THRU 1145-EXIT
>>> MOVE WS-SEC OF WS-TIME TO DS-SEC
>>> MOVE DS-TABLE TO S-DATE
>>> ELSE
>>> GO TO 1150-EXIT.
>>> COMPUTE T-STORE = DS-DATE - S-DATE.
>>> IF T-STORE < 90 AND NOT KLINGONS-ATTACKING
>>> MOVE 14 TO MAX-NO
>>> COMPUTE W = ((HQ2 - 1) * 14)
>>> COMPUTE Z = ((HQ1 - 1) * 14)
>>> INSPECT MASTER-TBL REPLACING ALL "K" BY " "
>>> MOVE 0 TO RX
>>> PERFORM 1170-MOVE-ON-HQ THRU 1170-EXIT
>>> VARYING KCTR FROM 1 BY 1 UNTIL KCTR > KLINGONS
>>> MOVE 1 TO ATTACK-FLAG
>>> PERFORM 5900-TRANS THRU 5900-EXIT
>>> IF (Q1 NOT = HQ1 OR Q2 NOT = HQ2)
>>> DISPLAY "WARNING - STAR DATE: " S-DATE
>>> DISPLAY "SCIENCE OFFICER SPOCK ADVISES"
>>> DISPLAY "YOU NAVIGATE TO QUADRANT " HQ1 "," HQ2
>>> DISPLAY "TO DEFEND STAR FLEET HEADQUARTERS".
>>> IF NOT TOO-LATE
>>> MOVE DS-DATE TO WS-DATE.
>>> IF S-DATE > WS-DATE AND Q1 = HQ1 AND Q2 = HQ2 AND NOT TOO-LAT
>>> - E
>>> MOVE 1 TO TOO-LATE-FLAG
>>> ADD 230 TO WS-DATE
>>> ELSE
>>> IF S-DATE > WS-DATE
>>> MOVE 1 TO INDICATE-X
>>> PERFORM 8200-CK-DONE THRU 8200-EXIT.
>>> 1150-EXIT. EXIT.
>>>
>>> :-)
>>>
>>
>> If I had a programmer working for me who coded like that,be having a talk.
>> I HAVE seen code like that, usually written by someone who thought
>> programming was beneath him and was bored. Such people were usually
>> promoted to management, where they fit right in.
>>
>
> Speak to Kurt.
>
> IDENTIFICATION DIVISION.
> PROGRAM-ID. STREK.
> AUTHOR. KURT WILHELM.
> INSTALLATION. OAKLAND UNIVERSITY.
> DATE-WRITTEN. COMPLETED SEPTEMBER 1, 1979.
> *
> *******************************************************
> * STAR_TREK SIMULATES AN OUTER SPACE ADVENTURE GAME *
> * ON A REMOTE TERMINAL. THE USER COMMANDS THE U.S.S. *
> * ENTERPRISE, AND THRU VARIOUS OFFENSIVE AND DEFEN- *
> * SIVE COMMANDS, TRAVELS THROUGHOUT THE GALAXY ON A *
> * MISSION TO DESTROY ALL KLINGONS, WHICH ALSO MANEU- *
> * VER AND FIRE ON THE ENTERPRISE. *
> *******************************************************
> ^^^^^^^^^^
This is an early example of what is known as "Enterprise software".
;-)
--
Charles Richmond
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417166 is a reply to message #415474] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 05:40 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 7/23/2022 10:08 PM, 25B.Z959 wrote:
>
[snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>
> I still sometimes buy actual BOOKS ... hard to hold three
> different pages open at the same time on the net and flip
> back and forth. Just ain't the same. I think the tangibility
> of paper enhances memory too, multi-sensory association.
> A lot easier to scribble notes circles and arrows on it too.
>
A problem I had was experiential... I was used to getting "serious
information" from hard back books, and trivial, fun-type stuff from
paperbacks. So when textbook-type stuff came out in paperback, my mind
did *not* want to retain the information. I had a similar problem with
web page stuff... web pages were so temporary... you glance at them and
move on... my mind keeps saying "Next!!!" :-(
--
Charles Richmond
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417167 is a reply to message #417164] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 07:17 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 04:19:08 -0500
Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> COBOL is *great* for a programmer that gets paid "by the lines of code".
I am so glad I was never paid that way - many of my most productive
days have had large negative counts of lines of code added to the system
while adding functionality, reliability and vastly improving readability.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417168 is a reply to message #417158] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 08:45 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 10/28/2022 5:17 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-10-28, Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 02:20:00 -0500, Charles Richmond wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/25/2022 5:52 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>
>>>> A sufficiently determined programmer can write unreadable code in any
>>>> language. Convoluted code with no comments is even worse.
>>>> Convoluted code with outdated, incorrect comments is worse still.
>>>
>>> At a PPoE, we received FORTRAN code under a tech-sharing agreement with
>>> a competitor. A comment atop a convoluted subroutine read:
>>>
>>> C
>>> C IT TOOK ME A LONG TIME TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS
>>> C ROUTINE WORKS, AND IT WILL TAKE YOU A LONG TIME
>>> C ALSO, CAUSE I AM NOT GOING TO TELL YOU HOW IT
>>> C WORKS.
>>> C
>>>
>>> a very helpful comment indeed!
>>
>> In this context, it is obligatory to link this:
>>
>> https://gist.github.com/FedericoPonzi/f026ff5c210e738ee03d27 1c8fc0f29b
>
> Unfortunately, a lot of modern obfuscated bloatware is built around
> a subtle re-wording of this comment:
>
> You are expected not to understand this.
>
Dennis Richie himself tried to explain this an other odd comments on a
web page. Unfortunately that page seems *no* longer to be on the web,
but following this link from archive.org should get you to his explanation:
https://web.archive.org/web/20070220094221/http://cm.bell-la bs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/odd.html
--
Charles Richmond
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417169 is a reply to message #415884] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 08:46 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 8/2/2022 12:54 AM, 25B.Z959 wrote:
>
[snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
> In *theory*, digital is "forever" ... but format drift
> and the hardware base complicates the picture, so to speak.
> It's also an intangible media, something that could disappear,
> whereas film/paper will persist and persist.
Georges Méliès, who made the "A Trip to the Moon" movie around the turn
of the 19th to 20th century, had a problem. The copyright law did *not*
cover movie film, so they printed each frame on a piece of paper and
copyrighted that version. Later, when the movie film was lost, they
took single movie frame photos of the paper and re-constructed the film.
That's why current prints of this film look so peculiar.
So to combat "format drift", just print out the hex dump of the digital
version... print it on good-quality paper.
>
> And yes, those notebooks with wide-format print-outs of
> old COBOL and FORTRAN programs will be around 100+ years
> from now too. Just ask the great-great-grandaughter of
> Empress Siri to run 'em for you - IF she feels like
> catering to mere humans today :-)
To the contrary... I had some fanfold paper printouts done circa 1985
that were printed on a Printronix line printer. Recently took the paper
out of my storage box and scanned in a few pages. Put back into a dark
box, the next time I removed the printouts, all the characters had
vanished!!!!
Apparently exposing the old printout to light caused the typed letters
to disappear into oblivion!! I had the same problem with the characters
printed atop my 80-column punch cards... :-(
--
Charles Richmond
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417171 is a reply to message #417169] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 10:49 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 07:46:22 -0500
Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> Apparently exposing the old printout to light caused the typed letters
> to disappear into oblivion!! I had the same problem with the characters
> printed atop my 80-column punch cards... :-
Figures - and made me recall a ob around 1990 for the Inland
Revenue which involved a 300 gigabyte database (300 spindles too) holding
many tens of millions of records in three way many-to-many relationships. A
fair amount of data. One of the Inland Revenues long standing operational
requirements was that all computer held data must also exist in hard copy
so that it could in extremis be processed that way and if needs be typed in
as disaster recovery.
So we were asked to factor this into the design and arrange the
appropriate print outs and input mechanisms.
Instead we calculated the amount of paper required, the storage
space needed to file it all and the effort in man hours it would take to
type it all in and provided this analysis to TPTB asking for the necessary
resources to be added to the project requirements - somehow this long
standing universal requirement was found not to apply to this project.
The same project was also subject to the requirement that the
design be done using the SSADM methodology[1] - but for the bit I was in
charge of we were told to get it done and another team would back document
the system as though it had been designed using SSADM[1]. It's a pity that
the tools they had to use were insufficiently expressive to describe the
design we came up with - their faces when they understood the design and
saw the problem were wonderful!
[1] aka programming in a strait-jacket with thumbs duct-taped together.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: cars and COBOL and tricks [message #417174 is a reply to message #415976] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 13:05 |
|
|
Originally posted by: John McCue
Trimed follow-ups to: comp.os.linux.misc
In comp.os.linux.misc Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
> I don't have anything that modern but stopping the surveillance should
> be as simple as failing to pay the monthly fee. (Leave your cell phone
> at home if you really care.)
You can always remove the battery, if you have a Cell Phone
that allows one to remove a battery. If not, maybe a lead
box or aluminum foil ? I have no idea if that would work :)
Having a Cell Phone is nice if you have an Auto that is old.
> My car is not new enough for the backup camera but that seems like a
> worthwhile feature.
I do not have one either, but as I age, I can see that camera
as being very useful.
--
[t]csh(1) - "An elegant shell, for a more... civilized age."
- Paraphrasing Star Wars
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: self-documenting APL, not COBOL and tricks [message #417178 is a reply to message #417147] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 15:09 |
John Levine
Messages: 1405
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
It appears that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> said:
>> The main APL folk who created the code (Ken Iverson and Adin Falkoff)
>> wrote an intro document for APL. In the preface, Iverson said he tried
>> to make the intro "perspicacious"... (that word means simple and
>> straightforward...)
>>
> No, it doesn't mean that. It means quick witted and discerning. 'sharp'
> is a colloquial equivalent
Any chance he wrote "perspicuous" and you guys misread it?
--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417179 is a reply to message #417147] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 15:23 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Lew Pitcher
On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 11:26:30 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 28/10/2022 09:09, Charles Richmond wrote:
>> On 7/31/2022 9:05 PM, John Levine wrote:
>>> It appears that Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> said:
>>>> I think Lynn might weigh in on this, but I believe APL was used to
>>>> define
>>>> S/360 architecture.
>>>
>>> The 1964 issue of the IBM Systems Journal which was all about S/360
>>> included a description of the architecture in a version of APL.
>>>
>>> Shortly after that the started turning APL from a paper lanaguage into
>>> one that could run on a computer.
>>>
>> The main APL folk who created the code (Ken Iverson and Adin Falkoff)
>> wrote an intro document for APL. In the preface, Iverson said he tried
>> to make the intro "perspicacious"... (that word means simple and
>> straightforward...)
>>
> No, it doesn't mean that. It means quick witted and discerning. 'sharp'
> is a colloquial equivalent
perspicacious adj. having clear insight
New Websters Dictionary and Thesausus, 1991 edition
Seems about right to me.
[snip]
--
Lew Pitcher
"In Skills, We Trust"
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417181 is a reply to message #417165] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 16:47 |
Rich Alderson
Messages: 489
Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> writes:
> On 7/25/2022 4:45 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
[ snip ]
>> Speak to Kurt.
>> IDENTIFICATION DIVISION.
>> PROGRAM-ID. STREK.
>> AUTHOR. KURT WILHELM.
>> INSTALLATION. OAKLAND UNIVERSITY.
>> DATE-WRITTEN. COMPLETED SEPTEMBER 1, 1979.
>> *
>> *******************************************************
>> * STAR_TREK SIMULATES AN OUTER SPACE ADVENTURE GAME *
>> * ON A REMOTE TERMINAL. THE USER COMMANDS THE U.S.S. *
>> * ENTERPRISE, AND THRU VARIOUS OFFENSIVE AND DEFEN- *
>> * SIVE COMMANDS, TRAVELS THROUGHOUT THE GALAXY ON A *
>> * MISSION TO DESTROY ALL KLINGONS, WHICH ALSO MANEU- *
>> * VER AND FIRE ON THE ENTERPRISE. *
>> *******************************************************
>> ^^^^^^^^^^
> This is an early example of what is known as "Enterprise software".
> ;-)
Oh my $DEITY.
--
Rich Alderson news@alderson.users.panix.com
Audendum est, et veritas investiganda; quam etiamsi non assequamur,
omnino tamen proprius, quam nunc sumus, ad eam perveniemus.
--Galen
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417183 is a reply to message #417169] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 18:43 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> On 8/2/2022 12:54 AM, 25B.Z959 wrote:
>>
>
> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>
>> In *theory*, digital is "forever" ... but format drift
>> and the hardware base complicates the picture, so to speak.
>> It's also an intangible media, something that could disappear,
>> whereas film/paper will persist and persist.
>
> Georges Méliès, who made the "A Trip to the Moon" movie around the turn
> of the 19th to 20th century, had a problem. The copyright law did *not*
> cover movie film, so they printed each frame on a piece of paper and
> copyrighted that version. Later, when the movie film was lost, they
> took single movie frame photos of the paper and re-constructed the film.
> That's why current prints of this film look so peculiar.
>
> So to combat "format drift", just print out the hex dump of the digital
> version... print it on good-quality paper.
The only format more permanent than good-quality paper (or vellum) is clay
tablets baked in a good hot fire.
>
>>
>> And yes, those notebooks with wide-format print-outs of
>> old COBOL and FORTRAN programs will be around 100+ years
>> from now too. Just ask the great-great-grandaughter of
>> Empress Siri to run 'em for you - IF she feels like
>> catering to mere humans today :-)
>
> To the contrary... I had some fanfold paper printouts done circa 1985
> that were printed on a Printronix line printer. Recently took the paper
> out of my storage box and scanned in a few pages. Put back into a dark
> box, the next time I removed the printouts, all the characters had
> vanished!!!!
>
> Apparently exposing the old printout to light caused the typed letters
> to disappear into oblivion!! I had the same problem with the characters
> printed atop my 80-column punch cards... :-(
>
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: self-documenting APL, not COBOL and tricks [message #417184 is a reply to message #417178] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 18:43 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> It appears that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> said:
>>> The main APL folk who created the code (Ken Iverson and Adin Falkoff)
>>> wrote an intro document for APL. In the preface, Iverson said he tried
>>> to make the intro "perspicacious"... (that word means simple and
>>> straightforward...)
>>>
>> No, it doesn't mean that. It means quick witted and discerning. 'sharp'
>> is a colloquial equivalent
>
> Any chance he wrote "perspicuous" and you guys misread it?
>
Maybe pernicious?
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417185 is a reply to message #417167] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 18:44 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2022-10-29, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 04:19:08 -0500
> Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>
>> COBOL is *great* for a programmer that gets paid "by the lines of code".
>
> I am so glad I was never paid that way - many of my most productive
> days have had large negative counts of lines of code added to the system
> while adding functionality, reliability and vastly improving readability.
Yup. I would often cut the line count by 30%. If the original programmer
was particularly florid, make that 50%.
I did learn, however, that it can be hazardous to chop away at someone's
precious spaghetti if he's still there in a management position.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
|
|
|
|
| Re: cars and COBOL and tricks [message #417186 is a reply to message #417174] |
Sat, 29 October 2022 21:16 |
Joe Pfeiffer
Messages: 764
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
(deleted comp.os.linux.misc)
John McCue <jmccue@magnetar.hsd1.ma.comcast.net> writes:
> Trimed follow-ups to: comp.os.linux.misc
>
>> My car is not new enough for the backup camera but that seems like a
>> worthwhile feature.
>
> I do not have one either, but as I age, I can see that camera
> as being very useful.
Absolutely. The only reason we got one in my wife's car was we bought
off the lot and had no choice. After roughly a day we realized just how
valuable it is. I keep wondering about retrofitting one to my truck
(but none of the retrofits are anywhere near as nice as factory).
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417190 is a reply to message #417157] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 00:07 |
Mike Spencer
Messages: 997
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
> On 2022-10-28, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 28/10/2022 09:09, Charles Richmond wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/31/2022 9:05 PM, John Levine wrote:
>>>
>>>> It appears that Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> said:
>>>>
>>>> > I think Lynn might weigh in on this, but I believe APL was used to
>>>> > define S/360 architecture.
>>>>
>>>> The 1964 issue of the IBM Systems Journal which was all about S/360
>>>> included a description of the architecture in a version of APL.
>>>>
>>>> Shortly after that the started turning APL from a paper lanaguage into
>>>> one that could run on a computer.
>>>
>>> The main APL folk who created the code (Ken Iverson and Adin Falkoff)
>>> wrote an intro document for APL. In the preface, Iverson said he tried
>>> to make the intro "perspicacious"... (that word means simple and
>>> straightforward...)
>>
>> No, it doesn't mean that. It means quick witted and discerning. 'sharp'
>> is a colloquial equivalent
>>
>> By your context Iverson was using a word whose meaning he didn't
>> understand either.
>>
>> "Perspicacious" applies to an active intelligence, not a document.
>
> Maybe you need to be perspicacious to understand it.
"Perspicuous" is the word he was trying for. Don't attribute to
ignorance thatwhich is adequately exlained by a thinko.
--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
|
|
|
|
| Re: cars and COBOL and tricks [message #417191 is a reply to message #417174] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 02:14 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 17:05:58 -0000 (UTC)
John McCue <jmccue@magnetar.hsd1.ma.comcast.net> wrote:
> Trimed follow-ups to: comp.os.linux.misc
Oh please don't.
> I do not have one either, but as I age, I can see that camera
> as being very useful.
I've driven a few rental cars with them - they are very very nice.
The really big win is that you can see things which are too low to see from
inside the car - like short posts and toddlers. Fortunately the latter has
never been a problem for me but many years ago I had a neighbour who was
something of a basket case - turned out some years earlier he'd reversed
over his two year old son because he didn't know the child was out and
couldn't see him. A reversing camera would have made a huge difference to
his life - and given his son one.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: cars and COBOL and tricks [message #417195 is a reply to message #417186] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 05:43 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Bob Eager
On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 19:16:11 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> (deleted comp.os.linux.misc)
>
> John McCue <jmccue@magnetar.hsd1.ma.comcast.net> writes:
>
>> Trimed follow-ups to: comp.os.linux.misc
>>
>>> My car is not new enough for the backup camera but that seems like a
>>> worthwhile feature.
>>
>> I do not have one either, but as I age, I can see that camera as being
>> very useful.
>
> Absolutely. The only reason we got one in my wife's car was we bought
> off the lot and had no choice. After roughly a day we realized just how
> valuable it is. I keep wondering about retrofitting one to my truck
> (but none of the retrofits are anywhere near as nice as factory).
I'm in the UK, so right hand drive car; usually looking over my left
shoulder. I have a reversing camera.
I have a stiff neck, so I can't twist too far to the left. To make it
worse, I don't have a left eye. The camera is pretty well essential.
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417196 is a reply to message #415856] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 06:25 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 8/1/2022 1:53 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2022-08-01, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 11:02:12 +0100
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> When programming a ULA, is that software, or hardware?
>>
>> The gates etc. are hardware. The connection map is firmware if in
>> ROM, software if in RAM (I'm not aware of any examples this is just for
>> completeness).
>>
>> A good demonstration of this would be the researcher at (IIRC
>> Exeter) who used genetic algorithms starting with random data to evolve
>> circuitry on ULAs. One result was a frequency discriminator in under 100
>> gates, some of which were not connected to any signal path but were
>> required for the thing to work. I don't think that one was ever fully
>> understood - there certainly wasn't any kind of clock.
>
> Speaking of things not connected to any signal path:
>
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/magic-story.html
>
>> There's no useful distinguishing word between write once firmware
>> and rewritable firmware which is a shame.
>
> You could always specify whether the firmware is stored in a
> PROM, EPROM, or EEPROM. Depending on the circuit, you might
> even be able to replace one with another.
>
And all must be familiar with the "light emitting diode", but how about
the "noise emitting diode"??? With a noise emitting diode, you apply a
large voltage and you will hear one quick POP!!! Then the magic smoke
escapes, and the diode has to be replaced... ;-)
--
Charles Richmond
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417197 is a reply to message #415887] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 06:26 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 8/2/2022 3:39 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 20:37:43 +0100
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 12:22:38 -0700
>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If engineers built bridges the way programmers write programs, the first
>>> stiff breeze that came along would destroy civilization.
>>
>> Tacoma Narrows 1940 - nuff said ?
>>
> Beta-test first. And always keep a backup.
>
Always mount a "scratch monkey"... ?????
--
Charles Richmond
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417198 is a reply to message #417190] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 06:49 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 10/29/2022 11:07 PM, Mike Spencer wrote:
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>
>> On 2022-10-28, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 28/10/2022 09:09, Charles Richmond wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/31/2022 9:05 PM, John Levine wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > It appears that Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> said:
>>>> >
>>>> >> I think Lynn might weigh in on this, but I believe APL was used to
>>>> >> define S/360 architecture.
>>>> >
>>>> > The 1964 issue of the IBM Systems Journal which was all about S/360
>>>> > included a description of the architecture in a version of APL.
>>>> >
>>>> > Shortly after that the started turning APL from a paper lanaguage into
>>>> > one that could run on a computer.
>>>>
>>>> The main APL folk who created the code (Ken Iverson and Adin Falkoff)
>>>> wrote an intro document for APL. In the preface, Iverson said he tried
>>>> to make the intro "perspicacious"... (that word means simple and
>>>> straightforward...)
>>>
>>> No, it doesn't mean that. It means quick witted and discerning. 'sharp'
>>> is a colloquial equivalent
>>>
>>> By your context Iverson was using a word whose meaning he didn't
>>> understand either.
>>>
>>> "Perspicacious" applies to an active intelligence, not a document.
>>
>> Maybe you need to be perspicacious to understand it.
>
> "Perspicuous" is the word he was trying for. Don't attribute to
> ignorance thatwhich is adequately exlained by a thinko.
>
My bad... Yes, "perspicuous" *is* the word that Kenneth Iverson used.
--
Charles Richmond
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417201 is a reply to message #417196] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 07:33 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Thomas Koenig
Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> schrieb:
> On 8/1/2022 1:53 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2022-08-01, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 11:02:12 +0100
>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> When programming a ULA, is that software, or hardware?
>>>
>>> The gates etc. are hardware. The connection map is firmware if in
>>> ROM, software if in RAM (I'm not aware of any examples this is just for
>>> completeness).
>>>
>>> A good demonstration of this would be the researcher at (IIRC
>>> Exeter) who used genetic algorithms starting with random data to evolve
>>> circuitry on ULAs. One result was a frequency discriminator in under 100
>>> gates, some of which were not connected to any signal path but were
>>> required for the thing to work. I don't think that one was ever fully
>>> understood - there certainly wasn't any kind of clock.
>>
>> Speaking of things not connected to any signal path:
>>
>> http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/magic-story.html
>>
>>> There's no useful distinguishing word between write once firmware
>>> and rewritable firmware which is a shame.
>>
>> You could always specify whether the firmware is stored in a
>> PROM, EPROM, or EEPROM. Depending on the circuit, you might
>> even be able to replace one with another.
>>
>
> And all must be familiar with the "light emitting diode", but how about
> the "noise emitting diode"??? With a noise emitting diode, you apply a
> large voltage and you will hear one quick POP!!! Then the magic smoke
> escapes, and the diode has to be replaced... ;-)
I believe it would then be called a "dark emitting diode", DED.
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417202 is a reply to message #417196] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 08:59 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Oct 2022 05:25:10 -0500
Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> And all must be familiar with the "light emitting diode", but how about
> the "noise emitting diode"??? With a noise emitting diode, you apply a
> large voltage and you will hear one quick POP!!! Then the magic smoke
> escapes, and the diode has to be replaced... ;-)
The cool kids these days have Noise Emitting Resistive Fuses - much
the same design but they can be projected across a room somehow.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: cars and COBOL and tricks [message #417203 is a reply to message #417186] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 09:57 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
> (deleted comp.os.linux.misc)
>
> John McCue <jmccue@magnetar.hsd1.ma.comcast.net> writes:
>
>> Trimed follow-ups to: comp.os.linux.misc
>>
>>> My car is not new enough for the backup camera but that seems like a
>>> worthwhile feature.
>>
>> I do not have one either, but as I age, I can see that camera
>> as being very useful.
>
> Absolutely. The only reason we got one in my wife's car was we bought
> off the lot and had no choice. After roughly a day we realized just how
> valuable it is. I keep wondering about retrofitting one to my truck
> (but none of the retrofits are anywhere near as nice as factory).
>
Having seen one in my daughter’s car I absolutely want one. For better or
worse the old Honda just keeps ticking at 170,000m+ with very little
maintenance required, so I’ll just keep waiting.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: self-documenting APL, not COBOL and tricks [message #417204 is a reply to message #417178] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 11:53 |
The Natural Philosoph
Messages: 238
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 29/10/2022 20:09, John Levine wrote:
> It appears that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> said:
>>> The main APL folk who created the code (Ken Iverson and Adin Falkoff)
>>> wrote an intro document for APL. In the preface, Iverson said he tried
>>> to make the intro "perspicacious"... (that word means simple and
>>> straightforward...)
>>>
>> No, it doesn't mean that. It means quick witted and discerning. 'sharp'
>> is a colloquial equivalent
>
> Any chance he wrote "perspicuous" and you guys misread it?
>
I never read it in the first place: I responded to the OPS misuse and
his allegation that Iverson had used it.
If forgotten "perspicuous". It is a word I jave only seen used a very
few times, and anyone using it simply has to be showing off.
Which given the average computer scientist, sounds spot on.
--
"In our post-modern world, climate science is not powerful because it is
true: it is true because it is powerful."
Lucas Bergkamp
|
|
|
|
| Re: self-documenting APL, not COBOL and tricks [message #417205 is a reply to message #417184] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 11:55 |
The Natural Philosoph
Messages: 238
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 29/10/2022 23:43, Peter Flass wrote:
> John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>> It appears that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> said:
>>>> The main APL folk who created the code (Ken Iverson and Adin Falkoff)
>>>> wrote an intro document for APL. In the preface, Iverson said he tried
>>>> to make the intro "perspicacious"... (that word means simple and
>>>> straightforward...)
>>>>
>>> No, it doesn't mean that. It means quick witted and discerning. 'sharp'
>>> is a colloquial equivalent
>>
>> Any chance he wrote "perspicuous" and you guys misread it?
>>
>
> Maybe pernicious?
>
I think he probably meant abstruse.
--
"In our post-modern world, climate science is not powerful because it is
true: it is true because it is powerful."
Lucas Bergkamp
|
|
|
|
| Re: self-documenting APL, not COBOL and tricks [message #417206 is a reply to message #417204] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 13:24 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 29/10/2022 20:09, John Levine wrote:
>> It appears that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> said:
>>>> The main APL folk who created the code (Ken Iverson and Adin Falkoff)
>>>> wrote an intro document for APL. In the preface, Iverson said he tried
>>>> to make the intro "perspicacious"... (that word means simple and
>>>> straightforward...)
>>>>
>>> No, it doesn't mean that. It means quick witted and discerning. 'sharp'
>>> is a colloquial equivalent
>>
>> Any chance he wrote "perspicuous" and you guys misread it?
>>
> I never read it in the first place: I responded to the OPS misuse and
> his allegation that Iverson had used it.
> If forgotten "perspicuous". It is a word I jave only seen used a very
> few times, and anyone using it simply has to be showing off.
>
> Which given the average computer scientist, sounds spot on.
>
I’ve NEVER seen it, and since I regularly do fairly well on the New York
Times “Spelling Bee,” it must be very rare indeed.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417209 is a reply to message #417166] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 14:34 |
Mike Spencer
Messages: 997
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> writes:
> On 7/23/2022 10:08 PM, 25B.Z959 wrote:
>
> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>
>>
>> I still sometimes buy actual BOOKS ... hard to hold three
>> different pages open at the same time on the net and flip
>> back and forth. Just ain't the same. I think the tangibility
>> of paper enhances memory too, multi-sensory association.
>> A lot easier to scribble notes circles and arrows on it too.
Agree on all points. I recently went to look something up in a serious
book I'd read in 1976. The margins are full of notes I made at the
time. But I could go to my bookshelves, spot the book, find the
sought-for squib.
> A problem I had was experiential... I was used to getting "serious
> information" from hard back books, and trivial, fun-type stuff from
> paperbacks. So when textbook-type stuff came out in paperback, my mind
> did *not* want to retain the information.
I don't have a problem with paper binding. I like hardback for the
feel but paper is fine. I never saw a hardbound copy of K&R.
McCulloch's Embodiments of Mind reissued (AFAIK) only in paper. And
there's this: I don't know the book industry's terminology but some
paper bound books will stand up to the most abusive treatment while
remaining intact while the bindings of some hardbound books
disintegrate on the second or third reading despite respectful
treatment. (Harper Collins, are you listening? You owe Neal
Stephenson fans a rebate.)
> I had a similar problem with web page stuff... web pages were so
> temporary... you glance at them and move on... my mind keeps saying
> "Next!!!" :-(
Curious factoids picked up from web pages stay with me well enough.
[1] Deeper stuff, more complex ideas that I have to strive to
understand, leave little or no trace a short while after they leave
the screen. Books I can keep going back to, leave them by my favorite
chair, be reminded that I want to re-peruse them when I spot the
familiar binding on the shelf.
I have the complete works of Shakespeare on my HD. It's wonderful
because I can grep for quotations. Same for the KJV of the Bible.
But if I'm about to watch a Shakespeare play, I read it with my feet
up in my W. J. Craig hardbound book.
[1] Milk sieve recall: The milk and cream pass right through. The
straws, dead flies and bits of cow turd are retained.
--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
|
|
|
|
| Re: self-documenting APL, not COBOL and tricks [message #417210 is a reply to message #417206] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 15:15 |
John Levine
Messages: 1405
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
According to Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>:
>>> Any chance he wrote "perspicuous" and you guys misread it?
> I’ve NEVER seen it, and since I regularly do fairly well on the New York
> Times “Spelling Bee,” it must be very rare indeed.
Ah, kids these days. You'll never see PERSPICUOUS in the spelling bee
because it has eight different letters.
Nice to see that usenet is still fulfilling its early educational purpose, though.
--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417213 is a reply to message #417156] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 16:47 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Vir Campestris
On 28/10/2022 23:16, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> It was fun to watch the operator's face...
One of my first projects was to improve the performance of some tape
backup software by using more buffers. I used three in a ring which
meant there was one being read, one being written, and one being queued
up on the slower of the disc or tape.
It's 40 years ago now, but I can still remember standing in front of the
(reel to reel, mainframe 1600BPI drive) with a grin on my face watching
it spinning around when one of the operators came over and said "Looks
like you have a tape runaway there". (A runaway is when you've told the
drive to seek to something, and it isn't there.)
I just lifted up my arm slowly and pointed at the write light.
Probably my favourite memory from my first job.
Andy
|
|
|
|
| Re: self-documenting APL, not COBOL and tricks [message #417214 is a reply to message #417205] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 17:07 |
Harry Vaderchi
Messages: 719
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Oct 2022 15:55:19 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 29/10/2022 23:43, Peter Flass wrote:
>> John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>>> It appears that The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> said:
>>>> > The main APL folk who created the code (Ken Iverson and Adin Falkoff)
>>>> > wrote an intro document for APL. In the preface, Iverson said he tried
>>>> > to make the intro "perspicacious"... (that word means simple and
>>>> > straightforward...)
>>>> >
>>>> No, it doesn't mean that. It means quick witted and discerning. 'sharp'
>>>> is a colloquial equivalent
>>>
>>> Any chance he wrote "perspicuous" and you guys misread it?
>>>
>>
>> Maybe pernicious?
>>
> I think he probably meant abstruse.
>
I hope you're not being obtuse.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417216 is a reply to message #417213] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 18:18 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Bob Eager
On Sun, 30 Oct 2022 20:47:18 +0000, Vir Campestris wrote:
> One of my first projects was to improve the performance of some tape
> backup software by using more buffers. I used three in a ring which
> meant there was one being read, one being written, and one being queued
> up on the slower of the disc or tape.
>
> It's 40 years ago now, but I can still remember standing in front of the
> (reel to reel, mainframe 1600BPI drive) with a grin on my face watching
> it spinning around when one of the operators came over and said "Looks
> like you have a tape runaway there". (A runaway is when you've told the
> drive to seek to something, and it isn't there.)
>
> I just lifted up my arm slowly and pointed at the write light.
I did some work for a large financial company, writing a compiler for a
query language that had been compiled and interpreted by COBOL programs.
I got a BIG speedup, enough to secure some new contracts.
They (the UK office) then asked me to implement it on another kind of
machine. We discovered that the US parent office (in Boston, I think) had
declared that the Brits were wasting their time and it couldn't be done.
The UK guy had faith in me. And we got a massive speedup there too.
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: COBOL and tricks [message #417218 is a reply to message #417216] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 20:20 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> writes:
> I did some work for a large financial company, writing a compiler for a
> query language that had been compiled and interpreted by COBOL programs.
>
> I got a BIG speedup, enough to secure some new contracts.
>
> They (the UK office) then asked me to implement it on another kind of
> machine. We discovered that the US parent office (in Boston, I think) had
> declared that the Brits were wasting their time and it couldn't be done.
>
> The UK guy had faith in me. And we got a massive speedup there too.
turn of the century, large financial outsourcing company that did half
of all issuing (i.e. credit cards) in the US (embossing,
statmenting/billing, transactions, call centers, etc) ... had 40+ max
configured IBM mainframes (@$30M) (number needed to finishing settlement
in the overnight window), all running 450k cobol statement program
.... they did have large group that had been responsible for the
performance care&feeding for decades ... but had gotten somewhat
myopically focused on instruction hot-spots.
I was to look at throughput ... using some performance analysis
technology from the early 70s at the ibm cambridge science center and
found 14% improvement. Another person was brought in using different
technology that found another 7% (total 21% throughput improvement for
> 40*$30M operation).
What was funny was the other technology, he had aquired in the early 90s
(during IBM troubles and unloading lots of stuff) an APL system analysis
program that he then ran through an APL->C converter ... he had been
using it for (both IBM and non-IBM) datacenter performance consulting
business (around the world)
It turns out it was a descendent of the IBM HONE (world-wide online
sales&marketing support) 70s "Performance Predictor" (IBM reps could
enter customer workload&configuration questions and ask "what-if"
questions regarding changes to workload &/or configuration) ... which
was an APL-based analytical system model (also) developed at the IBM
Cambridge Science Center.
trivia: mid-70s, US HONE datacenters were all consolidated in silicon
valley and enhanced to have eight mainframe systems configured in
loosely-coupled, single-system-image with load-balancing and fall-over
across the complex (load-balancing decisions were implemented with a
modified version of the "performance predictor").
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
| Re: cars and COBOL and tricks [message #417219 is a reply to message #417203] |
Sun, 30 October 2022 22:28 |
Rich Alderson
Messages: 489
Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
>> (deleted comp.os.linux.misc)
>>
>> John McCue <jmccue@magnetar.hsd1.ma.comcast.net> writes:
>>
>>> Trimed follow-ups to: comp.os.linux.misc
>>>
>>>> My car is not new enough for the backup camera but that seems like a
>>>> worthwhile feature.
>>>
>>> I do not have one either, but as I age, I can see that camera
>>> as being very useful.
>>
>> Absolutely. The only reason we got one in my wife's car was we bought
>> off the lot and had no choice. After roughly a day we realized just how
>> valuable it is. I keep wondering about retrofitting one to my truck
>> (but none of the retrofits are anywhere near as nice as factory).
>>
>
> Having seen one in my daughter’s car I absolutely want one. For better or
> worse the old Honda just keeps ticking at 170,000m+ with very little
> maintenance required, so I’ll just keep waiting.
My wife and I have aftermarket units in her Lexus and my Scion. Great things.
--
Rich Alderson news@alderson.users.panix.com
Audendum est, et veritas investiganda; quam etiamsi non assequamur,
omnino tamen proprius, quam nunc sumus, ad eam perveniemus.
--Galen
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
