Simplicity

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Jerry Coffin

    #31
    Re: Simplicity

    "Gary Labowitz" <glabowitz@comc ast.net> wrote in message news:<-PudnTP9IMUqvKbc RVn-vA@comcast.com> ...

    [ ... ]
    [color=blue]
    > I'm not quibbling with your parsing. But I was studying BASIC in 1956 (my
    > first year in college) and I think I remember seeing it referred to as
    > "Beginners' All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code" then. I have always been
    > under the impression that this was it's acronym right from the start. (Built
    > my first computer in 1954, but it was hardwired and didn't have
    > programming.)
    >
    > I'm only saying that this is my recollection; it has been 48 years, so take
    > it for what it might be worth.[/color]

    In this case, your recollection is clearly flawed -- in 1956, BASIC
    simply didn't exist. About the only thing I can think of at that time
    that _might_ be open to being mis-remembered as BASIC would have been
    one of the early versions of FORTRAN -- and even that's quite a
    stretch.

    --
    Later,
    Jerry.

    The universe is a figment of its own imagination.

    Comment

    • Julián Albo

      #32
      Re: Simplicity

      JKop wrote:
      [color=blue][color=green]
      >> still can't translate natural languages with a program.][/color]
      >
      > www.google.com/language_tools
      >
      > Not perfect, but very good indeed.[/color]

      Yes, but if you think in the progress made in that field since the 60,
      compared with other areas, the result seems very poor.

      --
      Salu2

      Comment

      • Gary Labowitz

        #33
        Re: Simplicity

        "Jerry Coffin" <jcoffin@taeus. com> wrote in message
        news:b2e4b04.04 09051059.75ebae 50@posting.goog le.com...[color=blue]
        > "Gary Labowitz" <glabowitz@comc ast.net> wrote in message[/color]
        news:<-PudnTP9IMUqvKbc RVn-vA@comcast.com> ...[color=blue]
        >
        > [ ... ]
        >[color=green]
        > > I'm not quibbling with your parsing. But I was studying BASIC in 1956[/color][/color]
        (my[color=blue][color=green]
        > > first year in college) and I think I remember seeing it referred to as
        > > "Beginners' All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code" then. I have always[/color][/color]
        been[color=blue][color=green]
        > > under the impression that this was it's acronym right from the start.[/color][/color]
        (Built[color=blue][color=green]
        > > my first computer in 1954, but it was hardwired and didn't have
        > > programming.)
        > >
        > > I'm only saying that this is my recollection; it has been 48 years, so[/color][/color]
        take[color=blue][color=green]
        > > it for what it might be worth.[/color]
        >
        > In this case, your recollection is clearly flawed -- in 1956, BASIC
        > simply didn't exist. About the only thing I can think of at that time
        > that _might_ be open to being mis-remembered as BASIC would have been
        > one of the early versions of FORTRAN -- and even that's quite a
        > stretch.[/color]

        Yes, too big a stretch. I was familiar with FORTRAN then. In fact, one of my
        first assignments at IBM (1962) was to teach it. I also taught SPS,
        Assembler, and Autocoder. The FORTRAN was for the 1620, and the engineers
        loved it. [Don't quote me on any of this -- it might have been 1963! Ah,
        1963. I was rewiring a 407 board for a bank in Joplin, MO, when Kennedy was
        shot. I guess we all remember where we were for that event. That is, those
        of us who were anywhere.]
        --
        Gary


        Comment

        • Phlip

          #34
          Re: ReRef

          JKop wrote:
          [color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
          > >> Nope, self-sufficent, both me *and* my code.[/color]
          > >
          > > How wonderful for you. Are you at a University?[/color]
          >
          > Nope, I'm what Americans would term a "High School Drop-
          > out". I starting Visual Basic when I was 12ish, then moved
          > on to C++ when I was 15ish, and now I'm 18. I work full-
          > time as an Office Administrator, doing invoices,
          > correspondance, and the like.[/color]

          While your ability to program professionally cannot be determined from your
          online attitude, if I were hiring I would look for candidates who have made
          an investment in themselves. College provides the appearance of such
          investment (whether or not it really happened). Playing with programming
          languages, even if you have the "knack", does not qualify.

          I would also look for team awareness, even among loners. If you actually
          were ecologically self-sufficient, for example, you would live in a cabin
          and grow a little garden out in front. If, however, you don't weed that
          garden and keep pests out, your self-sufficiency will not sustain.

          All software projects need sustainability, by any means necessary.

          (There's nothing wrong with remaining a dilettante. Just don't expect this
          newsgroup to sustain bad advice...)

          --
          Phlip
          Industrial XP: Extreme Programming, XP, Agile Software Development, Agile Methods.



          Comment

          • JKop

            #35
            Re: ReRef

            [color=blue]
            > While your ability to program professionally cannot be determined from
            > your online attitude[/color]

            Look at my code.
            [color=blue]
            > , if I were hiring I would look for candidates who
            > have made an investment in themselves.[/color]

            Please spare me the methaphors.
            [color=blue]
            > College provides the appearance
            > of such investment (whether or not it really happened).[/color]

            There's plenty of ways one can invest in one's self. Some people can lift
            500kg. Some people can do 270 degree splits. Some people can run 100m in
            under 10 seconds.
            [color=blue]
            > Playing with
            > programming languages, even if you have the "knack", does not qualify.[/color]

            Qualify for what?

            I can program in C++. No two ways about it. Sure, an employer would like to
            see qualifications, but I haven't got any. If I were to pursue a job in C++
            programming, I could apply to take some sort of assesment to attain a
            qualification which an employer would like.
            [color=blue]
            > I would also look for team awareness, even among loners. If you
            > actually were ecologically self-sufficient, for example, you would live
            > in a cabin and grow a little garden out in front.[/color]

            Relevance?
            [color=blue]
            > If, however, you
            > don't weed that garden and keep pests out, your self-sufficiency will
            > not sustain.[/color]

            Self-sufficency is relative. I might be stationary right now, but relative
            to the sun I'm movin very fast indeed.
            [color=blue]
            > All software projects need sustainability, by any means necessary.[/color]

            ....
            [color=blue]
            > (There's nothing wrong with remaining a dilettante. Just don't expect
            > this newsgroup to sustain bad advice...)[/color]

            I don't.


            -JKop





            Comment

            Working...