|
|
No Turbo Pascal? 
In college I had some classes that used VAX Pascal and others that used Turbo Pascal. My first introduction to C was with Whitesmith's C on a VAX, but later I got to use Turbo C, never Quick C.
All the C I did on paying jobs (1994-2002) was VAX or DEC C; none of those toy compilers. 
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it was a nice IDE and amazing in those days of EDLIN and Vi.
|
|
|
|
|
I still "relapse" back to BRIEF emulation on Visual Slick Edit when I want to get something complicated done quickly in a text editor.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh yes, BRIEF was brilliant. You could even go 50 line mode. The macro language was the bomb. Wonder why they never moved over to a Windows version?
|
|
|
|
|
Oh yes. I liked the C extension language (although it was a little complex). And you could set up execution of a makefile, and ...
In some ways it's still better than the editor in VS - I really miss being able to open multiple files (or even multiple views on the same file) in the "edit space" of VS. I know you can open a "second window on the same file, but it's not the same... 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
It is about our memory - I used to believe that C=64 was a supercomputer, until I run an emulator on my PC a few years ago... 
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
I know what you mean. About thirty years ago, I was working on the VDT software for a Telecoms testing suite: there were four of us in the team doing the VDT, 10 or so doing the presentation stuff at the computer end (two mainframes: one DB, one test, with integration and control via the VDT), another dozen doing the hardware interfacing to the line test equipment. Gawd knows how many managers...
And the company it was all going to work for got a suggestion from a test department employee who was fed up with the manual system. Suggesting that a ZX Spectrum could handle it pretty easily, and he had a boy who could write the code... 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: Suggesting that a ZX Spectrum could handle it pretty easily
And he probably was right about that part... 
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
My nostalgia[^] seems to be a lot better
I still enjoy those! (the actual good old ones, not (all of) the newer they have nowadays)...
My blog[ ^]
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
“Ya remember...when we were kids...how good the jellied bugs used to taste?
And there were those long rolls of paper with food stains on them.
(You could get two thousand yards for a nickel!)
And then there were those little round hard things that would explode in your mouth and blow your lips off...
Oh! And the cold pork fat bars with the carpet tacks!
Boy, they don’t make stuff like that any more...
These days it’s all goddamn chemicals!”
(In remembrance of Bernard Kliban)
(This message is programming you in ways you cannot detect. Be afraid.)
|
|
|
|
|
Dare I show my age here 
What about ANSI C & ISO Pascal on a 32k BBC Model B Micro, using Wordstar as the text editor!!
Now that was real programming... unless you want to get down and dirty with 6502 & Z80 hex opcodes.
Shawty
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: 2) Only 21 lines of code on screen at any one time, and only 80 chars wide.
You can see 46 lines of code in 50-line mode (start with /h switch) ! No way round width limit. I still have this on my pc, runs under XP without needing Dosbox.
|
|
|
|
|
I remember it very well, I still use CTRL+INS and SHIFT+INS for copying and pasting these days!
|
|
|
|
|
For example:
When you start typing a link into Chrome (like, the first letter even!), if it can resolve from your history what that link is, it pre-loads the page behind the scenes so that when you select the link, in all likelihood, most, if not all of the page has already been loaded. Firefox doesn't do that. I have no idea what IE does.
Yes indeedy, because I'm logging the HTTP Get stuff (I'm using .NET HttpListener) you can in fact see this behavior of Chrome's.
You also learn other things, more on the mundane level, but it gives one a real appreciation of what tags and attributes like "form", "submit", and "name" do and their interaction with regards to actually emitting a POST HTTP method. Or, another example, responding with the correct encoding of images vs text files.
It's quite fun stuff, and while I know that there's been a lot of work that others have put into the finer devilish details of writing a web server, it sure is nice to do something at the bare metal level which doesn't depend on IIS, doesn't use the bloated dog slow crap that I discovered is MVC Razor, or, in the *nix world, isn't a morass of arcane configuration files (Apache, nginx, etc) or involves yucky ducky languages/frameworks like Ruby on Rails.
Oh, and after several hours of hair pulling and teeth gnashing last night, I also learned that you do not (I was using an example, so I sadly copy&pasted the code) create buttons with and id of "submit" because this breaks, not just jQuery but the DOM itself, with something like $('#form').submit(); Go figure.
And of course the bug I found the most amusing is that (and it may have been fixed now, but according to SO it has been like this for like, you know man, forever) in Firefox, you can't programmatically submit a form unless the form actually has a button of type "submit". Wow.
What a f***ed up world the web is. And I was just reading on LinkedIn on some group post where someone said that XAML is more complicated and desktop UI is moving towards web-forms, which is much simpler.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
That sounds like "seriously interesting article" material going on there! Are you going to write it up at some point?
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: That sounds like "seriously interesting article" material going on there! Are you going to write it up at some point?
Eventually -- there's a lot of bare bones examples out there on writing a web server, I think what I would want to demonstrate are the nuances of browser behavior and data interaction. Though, putting together a functional but bare bones web-server would probably be useful too -- Sacha's Simple REST Framework[^] though is a good place to start.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Agree-ing to Griff, and requesting for an article or the date of it! 
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
Afzaal Ahmad Zeeshan wrote: and requesting for an article or the date of it!
OK, OK, give me a few weeks. 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Hopefully weeks aren't Integral multiples of 52!
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, looking forward to the article(s), thanks !
Merry Xmas, Bill
«OOP to me means only messaging, local retention and protection and hiding of state-process, and extreme late-binding of all things. » Alan Kay's clarification on what he meant by the term "Object" in "Object-Oriented Programming."
|
|
|
|
|
I've experienced the same insights after learning most of my web dev skills from that "yucky ducky" framework you mentioned - Ruby on Rails. The affordances and speed gains you get from things like Rails or .NET MVC are definitely advantageous, but they definitely give you a lot of "magic" to really abstract what's going on. I've found that learning the bare metal technologies that power something such as Rails help me to be a more efficient coder...it's too bad that many people never take that next step and are happy to take on the technical debt and overhead of all that "magic" much too easily.
Happy Coding!
|
|
|
|
|
You also get problems submitting forms when you make your own javascript function called submit(), and try to set the form to call it on submission.
So I'm not surprised about the id thing
|
|
|
|
|
Also, if you think the web is screwed up, try writing desktop applications for OS X, Linux, and Windows. Good luck with that. You won't even get to writing code before going mental just trying to decipher which APIs are considered current and what language to use. Have fun doing any of the following:
1. Using a single language in all cases, even if it is something like Java that's supposed just work everywhere.
2. Sorting out what menu shortcuts to use and quasi-standards on them.
3. Integrating with the various taskbars.
4. Working on past versions as well as newer versions of the OS.
5. Making an installer that doesn't suck.
6. Providing updates.
7. Working with/around some of the "features" of each system. Gotta love the way Win7 automatically makes dialogs show up behind the current window, that's just so awesome.
As much as the web may be frustrating as all hell, it pales in comparison to the wrist-slitting exercise of writing desktop applications of even the smallest semblance of quality.
Really, the only truly badass, "where's a cliff to fling myself off of?" part of web design is using CSS.
|
|
|
|
|
bantling wrote: Really, the only truly badass, "where's a cliff to fling myself off of?" part of web design is using CSS
This. CSS is the offspring of a rabid Tasmanian Devil and Satan and it is no way a love child.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
