• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Who's into FORTRAN?

I don't use Perl neither. Currently I'm on a diet of PHP and ASP (eeek), perhaps with a sprinkling of C, 6502 assembler or Microsoft Basic.
 
carlsson wrote:

> I don't use Perl neither. Currently I'm on a diet of
> PHP and ASP (eeek),

Oops, guess it's my fault for diving into the more modern stuff! :-(

> perhaps with a sprinkling of C, 6502 assembler or
> Microsoft Basic.

Ah that's better! C is still reasonibly scarey language - if
only we did fun apps programming at school in SmallC!

CP/M User.
 
I got into Perl out of necessity, back in 1998. We were doing some web development for the government, and they had chosen "Tango" (blech!) as their development language. I guess it was fine for simple things, but it was woefully under-powered for anything even moderately challenging. My fellow programmer and I started using Perl for that, and it worked great. I became hooked, and started using it for any purpose I could. I've done a boat-load of Perl programming since 1998.

I have used PHP for some web development as of late, and it is very close to Perl in its syntax. At least until you start throwing in OOP. I've never had the desire to use ASP though.

As for C, man I love its simplicity. C has very few keywords, unlike other, more bloated, languages. It does take a bit to get the hang of "rolling your own" for everything you do, but I think it makes you a much better programmer. How many of us C programmers have had to create their own linked list or hash table implementation? Now go to your average Java programmer and ask them to create their own linked list or hash table (not using the ones thoughtfully provided by Sun) and see how much head scratching goes on.

Don't get me wrong, I like languages with lots of built-ins and garbage collection and other wonderful things, but I also believe if that's all you have ever learned, you're a poorer programmer for it.

CP/M User said:
carlsson wrote:

> I don't use Perl neither. Currently I'm on a diet of
> PHP and ASP (eeek),

Oops, guess it's my fault for diving into the more modern stuff! :-(

> perhaps with a sprinkling of C, 6502 assembler or
> Microsoft Basic.

Ah that's better! C is still reasonibly scarey language - if
only we did fun apps programming at school in SmallC!

CP/M User.
Click to expand...
 
I have considered if I would be able to implement e.g. a linked list or a more complex structure in 6502 machine code. I think I could, but yet I haven't had a reason to do it. I did implement QuickSort in machine code a few years ago though, purely as an exercise.
 
My mom was really into FORTRAN and BASIC. She programmed on one of those ancient HP 9830A Desktop Calculators...and even figured out how to make the plotter draw seagulls and clouds all by herself. She also wrote in ASM for *ancient* TI calculators.

I don't remember the system she programmed FORTRAN on...
 
DoctorPepper wrote:

> Don't get me wrong, I like languages with lots of
> built-ins and garbage collection and other wonderful
> things, but I also believe if that's all you have
> ever learned, you're a poorer programmer for it.

Fortunately TP isn't like that & rountines can be added -
obviously though TP offers a quite a few more routines (bit
like BASIC), though offers just a little bit more C based
stuff as well! :-D

At least my website offers some routines which demonstrate
some of the smaller things which aren't usually demonstrated
in Turbo Pascal 3! :-D
 
Man, you truly are a glutton for punishment! Just kidding. I don't know if I'd go that far, to implement complex data structures in assembler (any assembler) at my feeble, elderly age. Perhaps if I were 20 years younger. Make that 25 years younger ;-)

Nope, I think C is as "low-level" as I want to get from now on. My days of assembler (8086 assembler) are long gone and mostly forgotten.

carlsson said:
I have considered if I would be able to implement e.g. a linked list or a more complex structure in 6502 machine code. I think I could, but yet I haven't had a reason to do it. I did implement QuickSort in machine code a few years ago though, purely as an exercise.
Click to expand...
 
Ah, the joys of Turbo Pascal. I really miss it. Pascal is/was a nice, clean language, easy to build on. I moved from TP to Delphi, and worked in that for quite a while. With the impending demise of Borland's developer tools division, I'm afraid it is probably the curtain call for commercial Delphi and Pascal.

Thank goodness for Free Pascal! At least Pascal won't die out completely.

Makes you wonder though, where would Pascal be now if Microsoft's implementation of Pascal had taken off?


CP/M User said:
DoctorPepper wrote:

> Don't get me wrong, I like languages with lots of
> built-ins and garbage collection and other wonderful
> things, but I also believe if that's all you have
> ever learned, you're a poorer programmer for it.

Fortunately TP isn't like that & rountines can be added -
obviously though TP offers a quite a few more routines (bit
like BASIC), though offers just a little bit more C based
stuff as well! :-D

At least my website offers some routines which demonstrate
some of the smaller things which aren't usually demonstrated
in Turbo Pascal 3! :-D
Click to expand...
 
DoctorPepper wrote:

> Ah, the joys of Turbo Pascal. I really miss it.
> Pascal is/was a nice, clean language, easy to build
> on. I moved from TP to Delphi, and worked in that for
> quite a while. With the impending demise of Borland's
> developer tools division, I'm afraid it is probably
> the curtain call for commercial Delphi and Pascal.

Ah the memories. Back in the days when I knew just a little
bit of Pascal (I learnt some on an Apple Mac) I had to
translate some Pascal programs into Delphi. Fortunately, I had
a teacher at my disposal & managed to easily play around with
Delphi - twas a bit scarey at first. I managed to excel with
it though - wrote this kick butt calculator - which I later
enhanced to make it load Bitmap images in the background! :-D

> Thank goodness for Free Pascal! At least Pascal won't
> die out completely.

Yeah well if it wasn't for Free Pascal it might of been a sad
death for Pascal - Delphi I guess is there, though only half
of it's really Pascal.

> Makes you wonder though, where would Pascal be now if
> Microsoft's implementation of Pascal had taken off?

Fortunately it didn't - Borland were on with a Winner in a way
- it makes me wonder how far CP/M would have got if Borland
made later versions for CP/M! :-D

CP/M User.
 
Actually, Quicksort of an array with 8-bit numbers was not too hard in 6502 machine code. I even got a response from someone else who had implemented in a completely different way (and perhaps a few cycles more efficient). The same guy had went ahead to implement Shellsort, Mergesort and one more while he was into it.

It all started with some teenager troll/wannabee who had frequented newsgroups for years, posting essays of garbage, pretending to have a lot of interior knowledge and contacts. A few years ago, someone asked for programmers to take on an impossible task, and even collected a fair sum of money (a few hundred $$$) to anyone who could complete the task, which still was impossible to implement given the hardware restrictions. Like money can stretch hardware limitations.

Anyway, this wannabee decided to take on the task, borrowed some development equipment and nothing happened for a long time. Then he comes back, posts random fragments of code he has picked up from various webpages. Yes, it was verified, but he claimed it was his own code and that there were only a limited number of ways to implement certain routines; therefore the code (and comments!) happened to be identical.

At that point, another of the veterans who is good at machine level programming challenged him to something relatively simple: implement Bubblesort in 6502 machine code. The idea was that even a such small example would yield a number of different implementations. Everyone were invited, but to send their code to the maintainer instead of posting publically. In the end, I think we were 10-15 people, if not more, who all implemented Bubblesort in slightly different variations and efficience. Needless to say, the wannabee never finished his implementation, but posted parts of the short routine, full of useless, surplus instructions and wrong assumptions.

I picked up a few of my computer science books on datastructures and algorithms, and went to implement Quicksort. The first attempt failed, but after changing to a different algorithm, I got it working and submitted it as a bonus.
 
carlsson wrote:

> It all started with some teenager troll/wannabee who
> had frequented newsgroups for years, posting essays
> of garbage, pretending to have a lot of interior
> knowledge and contacts. A few years ago, someone
> asked for programmers to take on an impossible task,
> and even collected a fair sum of money (a few hundred
> $$$) to anyone who could complete the task, which
> still was impossible to implement given the hardware
> restrictions. Like money can stretch hardware
> limitations.

> Anyway, this wannabee decided to take on the task,
> borrowed some development equipment and nothing
> happened for a long time. Then he comes back, posts
> random fragments of code he has picked up from
> various webpages. Yes, it was verified, but he
> claimed it was his own code and that there were only
> a limited number of ways to implement certain
> routines; therefore the code (and comments!) happened
> to be identical.

Sounds awlfully a lot like myself, there are times when I have
these ideas for programs or want to addapt something, though
timely comitments in my other greatest interest - ristricts me
- even some of my friends are even busier than what I am & get
swamped down. Wouldn't say I knock off a lot of code - but I
do a fair deal of interpreting of other peoples code, though
not alternating it to the point it's slightly something else.

Ironically enough, I also made a Bubblesort program - it was
based on a BASIC program - though I translated the routine
into TP - worked just as well. It was funny though, cause a
lot of Bubblesorting programs relied heavily on later TPs, in
comparision though, mine worked with Byte numbers I believe!

CP/M User.
 
In 1968, I walked into a small room at my college (UC Riverside, CA) and there it was.... a LOVELY IBM-1130 with NO ONE using it. It only had a FORTRAN compiler available so I learned FORTRAN. Remember those puzzles make out of cubes that make a bigger cube (SOMA). I wrote a FORTRAN program where you give it the total shape and it shows you how to solve the puzzle. I got 2 units of an A grade for that program. It would sit there and whir for 5 minutes before the selectric printer would wake up with the first solution. Man, life was great in college, I should have stayed there :wow:
 
chuckcmagee wrote:

> In 1968, I walked into a small room at my college (UC
> Riverside, CA) and there it was.... a LOVELY IBM-1130
> with NO ONE using it. It only had a FORTRAN compiler
> available so I learned FORTRAN. Remember those
> puzzles make out of cubes that make a bigger cube
> (SOMA). I wrote a FORTRAN program where you give it
> the total shape and it shows you how to solve the
> puzzle. I got 2 units of an A grade for that program.
> It would sit there and whir for 5 minutes before the
> selectric printer would wake up with the first
> solution. Man, life was great in college, I should
> have stayed there :wow:

Great, could you write me one of those Programs which
correctly figures out next lotto numbers, please?!?

CP/M User.
 
Yeah, an encyclopedia written by the people is a dual edged sword. Often it will end up with actual, helpful information, but in matters of history or as in this case people, it could become ugly. However, I suggest you write your own accurate story, point out the inaccuracies in tabloid press and subsequently Wikipedia. Find help from someone about search engine optimization to make your page the first one to appear on a web search.

Anyway, it is refreshing to see that Wikipedia is about posting stuff that can be verified, not neccessarily the truth. ;-) A commercially edited encyclopedia would probably work in the other way around, trying to verify all sources to find the truth and nothing but the truth.
 
Last edited:
carlsson wrote:

> Yeah, an encyclopedia written by the people is a dual
> edged sword. Often it will end up with actual,
> helpful information, but in matters of history or as
> in this case people, it could become ugly. However, I
> suggest you write your own accurate story, point out
> the inaccuracies in tabloid press and subsequently
> Wikipedia. Find help from someone about search engine
> optimization to make your page the first one to
> appear on a web search.

> Anyway, it is refreshing to see that Wikipedia is
> about posting stuff that can be verified, not
> neccessarily the truth. ;-) A commercially edited
> encyclopedia would probably work in the other way
> around, trying to verify all sources to find the
> truth and nothing but the truth.

I personally like Wikipedia for the music, it would be good if
they had people sharning their thoughts about albums from
certain eras - cause Wikipedia sorts them out so well - I mean
you can have albums sorted by year, decade, groups sorted by
era, etc. Some albums have a bit more information about it
than others of course, but ya can't argue with a track
listing (well unless someone stuffed up).

Next I reckon it'd be good to dive into the CDs which might
include an entire album a band/performer in particular did
earlier on all jumbled up onto CD - cause there's a number of
Greatest Hits, Anthology or just other CDs which do that. Even
EP records which have been stuck onto CD be good - for people
who might see an album & wonder if it's worth collecting. I
personally like to find out if a CD has an entire album - get
the track listing & program the CD player to play it that way
cause it's usually interesting to hear it in the same vein
that the original Vinyl was produced.

CP/M User.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top