 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 15:51:14 +0200, clipka <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote:
>Ahem...
>
>- The "Turing-Bombe" was a primarily /mechanical/ device.
So! When I started working for Burroughs Machines circa 1972 they were still
manufacturing (desk size) electro mechanical adding machines marketed as
computers.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> So! When I started working for Burroughs Machines circa 1972 they were still
> manufacturing (desk size) electro mechanical adding machines marketed as
> computers.
Hehe... When I was at school, one of the teachers paid something like
trivial wordprocessor program in ROM, and when you press a button, it
types the whole lot out onto paper using the integrated dot-matrix (!!)
printer.
It was the very height of technology. I mean, sure you can't actually
save your work, only print it. But it's so much better than a typewriter
because you can edit before you print!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> where we'd replace some rarely-used characters with the
> German umlauts,
I'm pretty sure this is why Americans call "#" the "pound sign." It's on the
keyboard in the same place the Brits put their currency marker.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> - Even its 1943 successor, "Colossus", was not Turing-complete, and
> programmable only by re-wiring.
Just to avoid confusion, everyone should be aware that Turing machines are
programmable only by re-wiring. Those two clauses have nothing to do with
each other. :-)
> Programmable computers? A German invention.
Needing to rewire something doesn't make it non-programmable. It just makes
it non-von Neumann.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 10:03:07 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>clipka wrote:
>> where we'd replace some rarely-used characters with the
>> German umlauts,
>
>I'm pretty sure this is why Americans call "#" the "pound sign." It's on the
>keyboard in the same place the Brits put their currency marker.
I've often wondered why Americans call "#" the pound sign and was going to ask
you but since my name is Stephen :P I looked it up. Interesting. It seems a
k/board. So another internet myth is born. :)
I know # as hash and generally pronounce it as number.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_sign#Usage_in_North_America
How is @ used nowadays? I believe it should only be used like 5lb @ 2/- a lb (or
5# @ 2c/pound) not "I will meet you @ the pub".
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> How is @ used nowadays? I believe it should only be used like 5lb @ 2/- a lb (or
> 5# @ 2c/pound) not "I will meet you @ the pub".
Yes, unless you're speaking SMS or 1337.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 16:30:12 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>Hehe... When I was at school, one of the teachers paid something like
>trivial wordprocessor program in ROM, and when you press a button, it
>types the whole lot out onto paper using the integrated dot-matrix (!!)
>printer.
>
>It was the very height of technology. I mean, sure you can't actually
>save your work, only print it. But it's so much better than a typewriter
>because you can edit before you print!
Was that a "Starwriter"? If so my father had one and it passed to me then to my
brother. It was only a bit of an improvement on an electric typewriter but a big
step for man on the manual ones.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 10:37:48 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>Stephen wrote:
>> How is @ used nowadays? I believe it should only be used like 5lb @ 2/- a lb (or
>> 5# @ 2c/pound) not "I will meet you @ the pub".
>
>Yes, unless you're speaking SMS or 1337.
I have seen it creep into modern usage. Shame!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8-10-2009 10:57, Invisible wrote:
>>> Well, THAT explains why the hell I can't even say his name out loud,
>>> never mind spell it. :-P
>>
>> as for pronunciation try dike-strah.
>
> Interesting. DJ seemed to think the K was silent.
well, then he was wrong in that respect.
>
>>> Apparently he was quite clever though. I only know about him because
>>> he apparently invented an algorithm for turning a series of
>>> expression tokens into an actual expression tree...
>>
>> You should also know him because I mentioned him a few times here. He
>> did a lot of work in concurrent programming (e.g. the P and V
>> operation). IIRC he (or his team) implemented the first interrupt
>> routines. He did a lot on designing programs from specification. Many
>> of the algorithms he is most commonly known for were originally just
>> examples of how to derive a program from a specification. You need
>> more proof that thinking about your algorithm and documenting it might
>> lead to new insights?
>
> Actually, now I think about it, I do vaguely recall looking him up on
> Wikipedia. Wasn't he one of those Ivory Tower theorists who thought that
> you can actually specify what a program is supposed to do
> mathematically,
he was, sort of.
> and then formally prove that the program you wrote does it?
not really, because that would imply that you write the program first
and then prove it. In fact it goes hand in hand.
With respect to the sort of above: he did a lot of very practical things
that have seriously influenced a lot of people and a lot of hardware. So
he was not only an Ivory tower guy. However, some of his work has that
feeling. My opinion about that is that he made a very big mistake early
on in defining his programming language (viz. guarded commands): he
introduced the assignment. The talk I sometimes give about his work is
therefore called: 'The assignment considered harmful'.
I am sure I said it before, if you want to improve your understanding of
programming read 'A Discipline of Programming' and/or 'Selected Writings
on Computing: A Personal Perspective'. The latter is a collection of his
EWD papers.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 18:33:44 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 10:03:07 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>
>>clipka wrote:
>>> where we'd replace some rarely-used characters with the German
>>> umlauts,
>>
>>I'm pretty sure this is why Americans call "#" the "pound sign." It's on
>>the keyboard in the same place the Brits put their currency marker.
>
> I've often wondered why Americans call "#" the pound sign and was going
> to ask you but since my name is Stephen :P I looked it up. Interesting.
The technical name is the "octothrope" IIRC.
What do you call "*"?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
