 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Look up "reverse Polish list".
>
> Or Reverse Polish Notation.
Actually, DJ used to refer to it as "Polish reversed lists", but
whatever. ;-)
Man, if it weren't for that guy, *I* wouldn't understand this joke either...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:52:16 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
>>> Look up "reverse Polish list".
>>
>> Or Reverse Polish Notation.
>
>Actually, DJ used to refer to it as "Polish reversed lists", but
>whatever. ;-)
>
DJ??
>Man, if it weren't for that guy, *I* wouldn't understand this joke either...
It is not very common
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Roman Reiner wrote:
>
>> I don't get it :/
>
> Look up "reverse Polish list".
I've always heard it as reverse polish LISP...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>>> Look up "reverse Polish list".
>>
>> Or Reverse Polish Notation.
>
> Actually, DJ used to refer to it as "Polish reversed lists", but
> whatever. ;-)
>
> Man, if it weren't for that guy, *I* wouldn't understand this joke
> either...
Who's DJ? Also, I think reverse polish notation is the correct name for
the postfix method of operator placement, and reverse polish LISP is
rather the name for the programming language on HP calculators which
used this notation (the calculators are stack-based).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 10:08:50 -0700, Kevin Wampler <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu>
wrote:
>Invisible wrote:
>> Roman Reiner wrote:
>>
>>> I don't get it :/
>>
>> Look up "reverse Polish list".
>
>I've always heard it as reverse polish LISP...
LISP is something new?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Actually, DJ used to refer to it as "Polish reversed lists", but
>> whatever. ;-)
>
> DJ??
David Jones. (Yes, that was his name.) Today we'd probably all call him
Davy Jones. Which would probably puzzle the hell out of him.
He was one of the lecturers at college. If you want to know about the
binomial theorum, or Dikjstra's shunting algorithm, or DeMorgan's
theorum, or the vector cross product, this guy can tell you everything
it is humanly possible to know, and how to apply it to any imaginable
mathematical problem. Try to explain to him that you're taking down the
B/W posters to replace them with colour versions of the same posters,
and he looks at you like "wait... what?" Very strange.
>> Man, if it weren't for that guy, *I* wouldn't understand this joke either...
>
> It is not very common
Possibly not. Unless - like me - you build expression parsers just for
giggles...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:07:25 +0100, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> DJ??
>
>David Jones. (Yes, that was his name.) Today we'd probably all call him
>Davy Jones.
Or Bowie. I once met someone who knew him as Davie Jones.
>
>He was one of the lecturers at college. If you want to know about the
>binomial theorum, or Dikjstra's shunting algorithm, or DeMorgan's
>theorum, or the vector cross product, this guy can tell you everything
>it is humanly possible to know, and how to apply it to any imaginable
>mathematical problem. Try to explain to him that you're taking down the
>B/W posters to replace them with colour versions of the same posters,
>and he looks at you like "wait... what?" Very strange.
>
>>> Man, if it weren't for that guy, *I* wouldn't understand this joke either...
>>
>> It is not very common
>
>Possibly not. Unless - like me - you build expression parsers just for
>giggles...
Woosh LOL
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 10:08:50 -0700, Kevin Wampler <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu>
> wrote:
>
>> Invisible wrote:
>>> Roman Reiner wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't get it :/
>>> Look up "reverse Polish list".
>> I've always heard it as reverse polish LISP...
>
> LISP is something new?
Huh? No... but somehow I have the feeling that something's going over my
head here.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 11:22:15 -0700, Kevin Wampler <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu>
wrote:
>> LISP is something new?
>
>Huh? No... but somehow I have the feeling that something's going over my
>head here.
I'm joshing :P
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 schrieb:
> David Jones. (Yes, that was his name.) Today we'd probably all call him
> Davy Jones. Which would probably puzzle the hell out of him.
>
> He was one of the lecturers at college.
Wait - is that "David Jones" as in "David E.H. Jones", aka "Daedalus"?
When I was a kid, there was a kind of scientific quiz show on German TV
where a school class would compete with their (non-natural-science)
teachers to explain entertaining physical (or sometimes chemical)
experiments. That David Jones guy was a regular guest "experimentor" on
the show (spoke quite a good German, except for his notoriously hoarse
voice).
As "Daedalus", he also wrote about some "crazy" ideas that stuck in my
mind, such as the "anti-greenhouse".
> If you want to know about the
> binomial theorum, or Dikjstra's shunting algorithm, or DeMorgan's
> theorum, or the vector cross product, this guy can tell you everything
> it is humanly possible to know, and how to apply it to any imaginable
> mathematical problem. Try to explain to him that you're taking down the
> B/W posters to replace them with colour versions of the same posters,
> and he looks at you like "wait... what?" Very strange.
Could be that guy... an amazing "practical genius" if I'm asked.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6-10-2009 20:07, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>Dikjstra's shunting algorithm
Why don't you learn that Dijkstra is with an 'ij' that is a single vowel
in Dutch and actually should be a ligature in print, but this is just
another example of how the Americans have destroyed a culture.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel wrote:
> another example of how the Americans have destroyed a culture.
Hey, you want to be able to spell properly, *you* invent computers. ;-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6-10-2009 22:38, Darren New wrote:
> andrel wrote:
>> another example of how the Americans have destroyed a culture.
>
> Hey, you want to be able to spell properly, *you* invent computers. ;-)
I assume you meant 'a character set' in stead of 'computers'?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel wrote:
> I assume you meant 'a character set' in stead of 'computers'?
I'm assuming the complaint is that the Dutch adopted ASCII for their
computers. If it bothers you, don't do that. ;-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 13:38:02 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>andrel wrote:
>> another example of how the Americans have destroyed a culture.
>
>Hey, you want to be able to spell properly, *you* invent computers. ;-)
Now here's me thinking that it was the Brits who invented the first modern
(programmable) computer. With the Bombe being built at Bletchley Park.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Dikjstra's shunting algorithm
>
> Why don't you learn that Dijkstra is with an 'ij' that is a single vowel
> in Dutch and actually should be a ligature in print, but this is just
> another example of how the Americans have destroyed a culture.
...he was Dutch?
Well, THAT explains why the hell I can't even say his name out loud,
never mind spell it. :-P
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...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Hey, you want to be able to spell properly, *you* invent computers. ;-)
>
> Now here's me thinking that it was the Brits who invented the first modern
> (programmable) computer. With the Bombe being built at Bletchley Park.
Likewise. It's just down the road from me.
But then, the programmable computer is one invention which really can't
be geniunely said to have been "invented" by just one person. This one
was actually down to many, many great minds.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 09:20:44 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> Now here's me thinking that it was the Brits who invented the first modern
>> (programmable) computer. With the Bombe being built at Bletchley Park.
>
>Likewise. It's just down the road from me.
There! It is now true.
I remember seeing a machine in Paisley museum that used recognisable punch cards
(IIRC about 18" X 24") from the 19th Century. Its output was woven cloth. So (as
usual) we Scots were there first (if you don't count the Chinese, who did
everything first). :P
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> There! It is now true.
>
> I remember seeing a machine in Paisley museum that used recognisable punch cards
> (IIRC about 18" X 24") from the 19th Century. Its output was woven cloth. So (as
> usual) we Scots were there first (if you don't count the Chinese, who did
> everything first). :P
That's nothing. A few months back, I went to the London Science Museum
and say half of Babbage's *brain* in a pickling jar. o_O
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 13:38:02 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>
>> andrel wrote:
>>> another example of how the Americans have destroyed a culture.
>> Hey, you want to be able to spell properly, *you* invent computers. ;-)
>
> Now here's me thinking that it was the Brits who invented the first modern
> (programmable) computer. With the Bombe being built at Bletchley Park.
And what language do you think the *Brits* speak? Hint: Not Dutch. ;-)
While the Brits invented the first computers, I'm pretty sure the whole text
processing aspect (and in particular the ASCII I'm guessing you're
complaining about) was happening in the USA. Not that EBCDIC had an ij
ligature in it either.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> David Jones. (Yes, that was his name.)
>>
>> He was one of the lecturers at college.
>
> Wait - is that "David Jones" as in "David E.H. Jones", aka "Daedalus"?
No. David K. Jones. Sorry.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 13:15:48 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> There! It is now true.
>>
>> I remember seeing a machine in Paisley museum that used recognisable punch cards
>> (IIRC about 18" X 24") from the 19th Century. Its output was woven cloth. So (as
>> usual) we Scots were there first (if you don't count the Chinese, who did
>> everything first). :P
>
>That's nothing. A few months back, I went to the London Science Museum
>and say half of Babbage's *brain* in a pickling jar. o_O
Yum, yum ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:15:16 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>
>And what language do you think the *Brits* speak? Hint: Not Dutch. ;-)
>
Nor American :P
>While the Brits invented the first computers, I'm pretty sure the whole text
>processing aspect (and in particular the ASCII I'm guessing you're
>complaining about) was happening in the USA. Not that EBCDIC had an ij
>ligature in it either.
Sorry Darren I'm just "pulling your plonker" ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7-10-2009 1:05, Darren New wrote:
> andrel wrote:
>> I assume you meant 'a character set' in stead of 'computers'?
>
> I'm assuming the complaint is that the Dutch adopted ASCII for their
> computers. If it bothers you, don't do that. ;-)
Nowadays with unicode we have a choice, well sort of at least. There
were times that most displays physically only supported ASCII and many
programming languages also only supported ASCII.
The problem for the 'IJ' is on the one hand worse than for e.g. the
eszett because everybody knows it is an 'i' and a 'j' together, and we
have always used that on typewriters. Now it is easy to add ligatures to
a font set the 'IJ' ligature is still not often used. Partly because
many look ugly and don't seem to fit into the font and partly because
not many people mourn the loss of Dutch culture.
The problem of the eszett (and umlaut) is OTOH perhaps a bit worse
because the Germans seem to have yielded to American imperialism by
changing their spelling rules so that German can now be spelled using
ASCII only.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7-10-2009 10:19, Invisible wrote:
>>> Dikjstra's shunting algorithm
>>
>> Why don't you learn that Dijkstra is with an 'ij' that is a single
>> vowel in Dutch and actually should be a ligature in print, but this is
>> just another example of how the Americans have destroyed a culture.
>
> ...he was Dutch?
yes, and we have gone over this already a few times.
> 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 http://forvo.com/word/dijkstra/
gives one pronunciation, I would probably rendered it slightly different
for an international audience.
Here is another attempt including his first names
http://badibulgator.free.fr/Dijkstra.wav
> 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?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> Sorry Darren I'm just "pulling your plonker" ;)
Oh, I know. :-) There's just a lot of people out there that seem to argue
Americans went and forced our alphabet on them or something. (And yes, I
notice it's never the brits, but the americans. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10/07/09 10:15, Darren New wrote:
> While the Brits invented the first computers, I'm pretty sure the whole
> text processing aspect (and in particular the ASCII I'm guessing you're
> complaining about) was happening in the USA. Not that EBCDIC had an ij
> ligature in it either.
EBCDIC is American.
--
"Modem," said the gardener when he'd finished the lawn...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10/07/09 15:55, andrel wrote:
>> 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
And he killed GOTO.
--
"Modem," said the gardener when he'd finished the lawn...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> On 10/07/09 10:15, Darren New wrote:
>> While the Brits invented the first computers, I'm pretty sure the whole
>> text processing aspect (and in particular the ASCII I'm guessing you're
>> complaining about) was happening in the USA. Not that EBCDIC had an ij
>> ligature in it either.
>
> EBCDIC is American.
Technically, it's from IBM, as in International Business Machines. ;-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
When we introduced English to the world we did it at the point of a gun
and with gunboat diplomacy. The American method was more economic,
supplying cheap(ish) computer products and English language films.
Somehow that seems more acceptable to people at large.
__
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> And he killed GOTO.
Then he did a great service to the world at large.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> 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.
>> 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, and then formally prove that the program you wrote does it?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel schrieb:
> Nowadays with unicode we have a choice, well sort of at least. There
> were times that most displays physically only supported ASCII and many
> programming languages also only supported ASCII.
> The problem for the 'IJ' is on the one hand worse than for e.g. the
> eszett because everybody knows it is an 'i' and a 'j' together, and we
> have always used that on typewriters. Now it is easy to add ligatures to
> a font set the 'IJ' ligature is still not often used. Partly because
> many look ugly and don't seem to fit into the font and partly because
> not many people mourn the loss of Dutch culture.
> The problem of the eszett (and umlaut) is OTOH perhaps a bit worse
> because the Germans seem to have yielded to American imperialism by
> changing their spelling rules so that German can now be spelled using
> ASCII only.
UR doin' it wrong.
In the good old times of 7-bit ASCII, we Germans had our own version,
the "GSCII", where we'd replace some rarely-used characters with the
German umlauts, sz-ligature and even the paragraph sign. Some computers
would have switches to toggle between different character ROMs for ASCII
and GSCII, while printers would have control sequences to activate GSCII.
In the times of 8-bit character sets, we Germans had our own 8-bit
codepage on the IBM computers (well, not exactly our own - we shared it
with other Western Eurpoean languages), and our own keyboard layouts.
And no, German spelling has /not/ been changed to "yield to American
imperialism". We still have the umlauts (with which we didn't change a
thing), and despite some people believing the contrary, we didn't do
away with the sz ligature either; we just changed the rules to make it
easier to know when to use the sz ligature and when not to, and while
this has effectively reduced the cases in which it is used, there are
still plenty of words in which it still constitutes the only proper
spelling.
We have a long tradition though how to deal with cases where the umlauts
and/or the sz ligature are not available (the sz ligature, in
particular, has never been available in all-uppercase spelling). /And/,
as mentioned before, we insisted on /not/ using ASCII, /not/ using
American keyboard layouts, etc.; so the Dutch "ij" issue seems to me not
so much a problem of "American imperialism", but laziness on the Dutch
side to /maintain/ their culture.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen schrieb:
> On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 13:38:02 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>
>> andrel wrote:
>>> another example of how the Americans have destroyed a culture.
>> Hey, you want to be able to spell properly, *you* invent computers. ;-)
>
> Now here's me thinking that it was the Brits who invented the first modern
> (programmable) computer. With the Bombe being built at Bletchley Park.
Ahem...
- The "Turing-Bombe" was a primarily /mechanical/ device.
- It was, despite its name, not Turing-complete.
- It was not even programmable; rather, it was designed /exclusively/ to
break the Enigma cipher.
- Even its 1943 successor, "Colossus", was not Turing-complete, and
programmable only by re-wiring.
Konrad Zuse, anyone?
- Filed two important patents in 1937, already describing all elements
of the Von-Neumann architecture.
- Built a mechanical computer prototype (Zuse Z1) in 1938
- Finished an electric binary computer in May 1941, which was
programmable via punch tape, and Turing-complete.
The only thing about "modern" computers Zuse cannot claim to have
invented is the /electronic/ computer, as his Zuse Z3 used relays and is
therefore consodered electromechanic. And multiple of his inventions
appear to have been made independently(?) by others - but still the Z3
was the only one to have them /all/.
Programmable computers? A German invention.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen schrieb:
> I remember seeing a machine in Paisley museum that used recognisable punch cards
> (IIRC about 18" X 24") from the 19th Century. Its output was woven cloth. So (as
> usual) we Scots were there first (if you don't count the Chinese, who did
> everything first). :P
Well, granted, you Scots were no doubt the first to do graphics
programming... :-P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
smc### [at] csccom schrieb:
> When we introduced English to the world we did it at the point of a gun
> and with gunboat diplomacy. The American method was more economic,
> supplying cheap(ish) computer products and English language films.
> Somehow that seems more acceptable to people at large.
Interestingly, the USA /almost/ went for German as their national
language (because they had difficulties agreeing on either English or
French, AFAIK :-P)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> Programmable computers? A German invention.
Programmable *electronic* computers? Maybe.
Perhaps you're forgetting a certain Charles Babbage, who designed a
Turing-complete mechanical computer _several hundred_ years earlier. (I
will admit, however, that it was never actually *built*.)
As I originally asserted: The modern computer really cannot be
attributed to any one single individual. It was a team effort, over a
period of several centuries...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 15:11:09 +0200, clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>so the Dutch "ij" issue seems to me not
>so much a problem of "American imperialism", but laziness on the Dutch
>side to /maintain/ their culture.
When I was working Croatia getting a UK keyboard was a problem as the standard
one was designed Slovak languages.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 15:54:01 +0200, clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>Stephen schrieb:
>
>> I remember seeing a machine in Paisley museum that used recognisable punch cards
>> (IIRC about 18" X 24") from the 19th Century. Its output was woven cloth. So (as
>> usual) we Scots were there first (if you don't count the Chinese, who did
>> everything first). :P
>
>Well, granted, you Scots were no doubt the first to do graphics
>programming... :-P
If there is money in it … ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 15:58:11 +0200, clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>smc### [at] csccom schrieb:
>> When we introduced English to the world we did it at the point of a gun
>> and with gunboat diplomacy. The American method was more economic,
>> supplying cheap(ish) computer products and English language films.
>> Somehow that seems more acceptable to people at large.
>
>Interestingly, the USA /almost/ went for German as their national
>language (because they had difficulties agreeing on either English or
>French, AFAIK :-P)
I believe there was only one vote in it.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 15:51:14 +0200, clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> 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
£200 for a large beige "electronic typewriter". It has a blocky LCD, a
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
coincidence that on the US keyboard it is in the same place as "£" on the UK
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
>£200 for a large beige "electronic typewriter". It has a blocky LCD, a
>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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
