We would not be here were it not for DTSS

On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 09:01:13 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
news:5d8i3ftv14mcvhvlpu40spj5u2tt1tek3n@4ax.com:

Was that a BASIC compiler or a BASIC interpreter ?


BASIC is a line by line interpreted language. There were
"compilers" made for it on *some* platforms.

There are many kinds of BASIC implementations.

Some interpret the source line each time it is executed.

Some interprets a new line to an intermediate language and this
intermediate code is used each time the statement is executed e.g. in
a FOR loop.

Some compile it to machine instructions as a FORTRAN or ALGOL compiler
will do. From several sources, it appears that DTSS BASIC was compiled
like ALGOL.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 9:22:36 PM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:3ec9c3c4-2f49-4603-aaa5-be43254a90cc@googlegroups.com:


If your computer history major didn't teach you that, you were
being sold a line of goods, probably by somebody who put a high
value on their own contribution.

You are still lost in your CONSTANT thinking that I missed something
or lack some knowledge you have. Fuck you, Billy. you retarded
fuckhead.

Sadly, the problem is that you did miss a lot, and it shows.

Complaining about people pointing it out doesn't make you look any better-informed. Your time would be more usefully spent getting better-informed, but that would cut into the time you can spend on pretending that you know what you are talking about.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 11:59:05 PM UTC+11, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 9:39:52 PM UTC+11, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 08:59:45 UTC, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

video. You brain is broken.

too broken to get that his brain is broken. It's called NPD. Lots of vids on youtube about it for anyone that cba to read.

Narcissistic Personality Disorder. One of the symptoms is that the sufferer thinks that everybody understands character strings like NPD in the same way that he does, so they don't see the point in spelling them out.

I'm sure that NT finds the subject fascinating, but he's too proud of his imagined prowess to notice that he's a text-book example of the problem.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 9:33:20 PM UTC+11, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:

On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 06:05:47 UTC, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in
news:0ebd20f8-5927-4cf5-8b2a-6d1436616ef0@googlegroups.com:
On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 01:40:00 UTC, John Robertson wrote:
On 2020/02/03 5:13 p.m., Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 6:57:19 AM UTC+11, John S
wrote:
On 2/2/2020 5:38 AM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org
wrote:

<snip>

He doesn't get it. It was not a trivial advancement, but even if
it was, it is still an advancment.

It enabled lots of kids to get into programming, resulting in lots of programmers, resulting in lots of software development later. What kinda dunce can't see that I don't know, but there ya go.

There were lots of programmers before primary school teachers got into trying to teach it to their pupils. It is a skill that can be learned in later life, and you are less likely to acquire bad habits if you acquire it then.

<snipped twaddle about light bulb connectors >

I'd bet that any school that has a course on computer science for a
junior high school aged child even today touches on BASIC, if not has
course paths that require its use as a lesson. Likely character
based games as well, and moving into the graphically capable
machines.

BASIC was essentially FORTRAN, cut down to shrink the compiler.

It's got no other obvious advantage as a teaching tool, and if it persists in computer science classes, it is for the same reason that elementary electronics classes still use the 741 and the 555 - nobody has bothered to rewrite the course notes around anything better.

> Computing today without Basic would be significantly less advanced.

Really? BASIC was a very primitive language, and it only survives because some people never got around to learning anything better.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 9:39:52 PM UTC+11, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:

On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 08:59:45 UTC, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

video. You brain is broken.

too broken to get that his brain is broken. It's called NPD. Lots of vids on youtube about it for anyone that cba to read.

Narcissistic Personality Disorder. One of the symptoms is that the sufferer thinks that everybody understands character strings like NPD in the same way that he does, so they don't see the point in spelling them out.

I'm sure that NT finds the subject fascinating, but he's too proud of his imagined prowess to notice that he's a text-book example of the problem.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Martin Brown]

On 04/02/2020 09:26, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 8:04:04 PM UTC+11,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
news:5d8i3ftv14mcvhvlpu40spj5u2tt1tek3n@4ax.com:

BASIC was not the first attempt to give computing to the masses.

FORTRAN (FORmula TRAnsform) was an 1950's attempt.

Wrong. FORTRAN was for the original building sized computers, not
"the masses". The "masses" it "was for" was college computer
science and engineering students, and staff engineers at the
companies using the computers that were in the field. There were
no computers in the hands of "the masses" back then.

This misses the point. The original computer programmers programmed
in machine language. Assembly languages made the process easier by
letting you write easily remembered words which could be directly
translated to the appropriate binary string.

FORTRAN was the first higher-level language which was compiled to
create the appropriate sequences of binary strings.

No it wasn't Alick Glennie's Autocode for the Manchester Mark 1 computer
in 1952 was arguably the first ever compiled language. Other computer
labs may disagree about exactly whose was the first. Autocode Mk1 went
on to be used on the Ferranti Mercury line of computers. Only the very
largest businesses and national laboratories could afford to run one.

He's another of those unsung heroes that nobody has ever heard of.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alick_Glennie
Even his Wiki entry is a bit sparse.

The physical size of the computer didn't come into it. The fact that
there weren't many of them initially limited the number of people who
needed to write computer programs, but when integrated circuits made
it a lot cheaper to build computers, the demand went up, and places
like Dartmouth started churning outprogrammers. Their existence
reflected the fact semiconductor technology had changed the world.
They were an effect, not a cause.

The physical size and sheer difficulty of keeping them running kept
computers out of all but a few enthusiast hands until the advent of the
home computer. A few dedicated chips to play ping pong arrived first.

Nascom Z80 based fro ÂŁ200 was the first half decent home computer kit
that I can recall but it required fairly deep pockets at the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nascom_(computer_kit)
(and a fair degree of skill with a soldering iron)

If your computer history major didn't teach you that, you were being
sold a line of goods, probably by somebody who put a high value on
their own contribution.

Until the Sinclair MK14 there really were no affordable home computers
of any sort in the UK. Affordable and capable mass market things like
the TI99/4, BBC Micro and ZX80 didn't appear until the 1980's. Not long
after that most homes had one if only for teenagers to play games on.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:f64588f4-cc6c-4b12-9d88-a142dffaeb6e@googlegroups.com:

It's got no other obvious advantage as a teaching tool, and if it
persists in computer science classes, it is for the same reason
that elementary electronics classes still use the 741 and the 555
- nobody has bothered to rewrite the course notes around anything
better.

You are a true idiot.

Teaching kids by starting with learning elements such as the Altair
or &$ series IC chips or the 555 timer is actually essential, you
stupid fuck.

Being simple, the 555 timer allows the teaching of the essentials
for that kind of integrated circuit operational paradigms. Using
something more advanced will not serve that goal.

I posted a link to an ATTINY10 microcontroller. Far more
complicated than a 555. But a fresh kid would learn a lot more from
learning about the 555, and THEN stepping toward something that
complicated. A LOT MORE.

You are jaded... or wait... that's right. You are just plain
stupid.

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:fbd9cf64-ba5b-4b1d-b804-2289b671907d@googlegroups.com:

On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 9:21:25 PM UTC+11,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:3ec9c3c4-2f49-4603- aaa5-be43254a90cc@googlegroups.com:

The physical size of the computer didn't come into it.

It was just a reference to the timeline ya dumbfuck. Those
were the
only machines around then. You are thick.

You are thicker. The PDP-8 wasn't remotely room-sized, and your
grasp of what was going on is - to put it kindly -
over-simplified.

AGAIN, you RETARDED FUCK!!! It did not even come out until the
middle of 1965.

Your grasp of the timeline is munged because of your retarded
attitude.

Whoever taught you computer history seems to cut his material back
to keep it within grasp of a rather dumb class.

I was writing in assembler as a kid, back when you were watching
others use computers.

You're a goddamned idiot. You == classless.

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:f64588f4-cc6c-4b12-
9d88-a142dffaeb6e@googlegroups.com:

snipped twaddle about light bulb connectors

Your mother was a twaddling whore when she let your dishonorable
jackass father buttfuck her so the criminal bitch could subsequently
shit you out. She should have been put in prison for failing to flush
you, the moment the severely assfucked street slut shat you.

Twaddle that, shitboy.

 

upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
news:ropi3fpga0r6598qujtf8hbi6o2hkp403s@4ax.com:

The students at Dartmouth collage in 1964 could not be labeled as
"masses" when they were running BASIC or ALGOL. Perhaps closest to
"masses" came those high-scool students, who had remote access to
this computer.

There were no students at Dartmouth running either, save for some
post grad student on ALGOL. The "masses" thing came as a result of
DTSS AND BASIC, and it was NOT compiled. It was specifically a
departure from ALGOL. The students got 'live sessions' at their
terminals, and the code was read line by line. If you want to call
that being compiled... The only thing about BASIC or any of our
languages that is ALGOL like is the syntactic structure languages use.

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:83450065-b34f-4682-9755-81d2635eb8ce@googlegroups.com:

Complaining about people pointing it out doesn't make you look any
better-informed.

You pointed NOTHING out. All you did was presume, you fucking stupid
jackass.

 

upsidedown@downunder.com wrote in
news:59pi3fdfkapdcjch8r65545jlngqb5ml9c@4ax.com:

Some interprets a new line to an intermediate language and this
intermediate code is used each time the statement is executed e.g. in
a FOR loop.

BASIC FOR loops STILL reference and jump to line numbers.

It is an interpreted language.

There were some psuedo-compilers made. But that is what they were...
PSUEDO. They were reliant on additional modules being added to a
system in most cases.

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:f64588f4-cc6c-4b12-
9d88-a142dffaeb6e@googlegroups.com:

BASIC was essentially FORTRAN, cut down to shrink the compiler.

BASIC was NOT a compiled language, you stupid fuck.

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:f64588f4-cc6c-4b12-9d88-a142dffaeb6e@googlegroups.com:

Really? BASIC was a very primitive language, and it only survives
because some people never got around to learning anything better.

You obviously have no clue what he means by "computing today".
Oh and we did not need a dumbfuck like you to tell us how primitive
the language is. WE ALL ALREADY KNOW THE LEVEL IT IS POSITIONED AT.
We ALSO know what its influence was, and you obviously do NOT.

That despite the fact that you are sitting at a PC or laptop that
would very likely not exist had the popularity of PCs not caused the
industry to bloom.

An IBM PC was 5 to 10 thousand dollars each. Clones were not.
Console computers were not. Gaming consoles were not. All were
affordable for the consumer, and all ran BASIC. The entire industry
came from consumer demand starting with small businesses and rich
folk's kids. It took over where RC planes were in rich kid USAdom.

You are a Trumpesque, never exposed to reality intelligence
compromised old fogey, with more than a few misconceptions about more
than few things about the world. Whereas I was there and watched it
happen and participated, unlike you standing by watching others make
use of the world while you interloped your way into the science
community.

 

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote in news:r1c385$13tn$1
@gioia.aioe.org:

Teaching kids by starting with learning elements such as the Altair
or &$ series IC chips or the 555 timer is actually essential, you
stupid fuck.

74 series. Can't shift-capitalize numerals!

 

On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 11:58:53 PM UTC-5, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:

On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 01:40:00 UTC, John Robertson wrote:
On 2020/02/03 5:13 p.m., Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 6:57:19 AM UTC+11, John S wrote:
On 2/2/2020 5:38 AM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

This is one of the major groups that brought us forward.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYPNjSoDrqw


Yes, I think so. That was a very interesting video.

I remember time-sharing and BASIC as well as Super BASIC. My program
allowed me to design very small high voltage transformers in a few
seconds rather than hours. And other designs as well. That was in the
early 60s.

Note that BASIC still exists in many forms and is very useful for
solving problems quickly. Power Basic comes to mind. I think JL uses it
for several purposes, like for his stock parts inventory.

And people think that climate change denial propaganda is worth propagating.

The fact that you can use BASIC and it it's variants to eventually do what you could do faster with a more appropriate language doesn't make a good choice.

DLUNU was claiming that the invention of BASIC represented some kind of advance. Teaching lots of undergraduates to program was a good idea, but that's it.


That's not unlike saying that teaching kids to read and write was a good
idea, but that's it. Probably just use reading and writing to record
cooking recipes - a waste of time!

It seems to me that allowing the average kid access to computers sparked
a major interest in these machines that would not have developed
anywhere near as fast.

In this matter I might fairly claim that you are the denier...(ducking)

John ;-#)#

Funny that he doesn't get the entire point of basic & how it changed the world.

Indeed. BASIC was great, FORTRAN's mindset was inflexible, fossilized
& sclerotic; fat-headed.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

On Sunday, February 2, 2020 at 6:38:19 AM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

This is one of the major groups that brought us forward.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYPNjSoDrqw

Good stuff, thanks.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[dcaster@krl.org]

On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 1:16:19 AM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 3:58:53 PM UTC+11, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, 4 February 2020 01:40:00 UTC, John Robertson wrote:
On 2020/02/03 5:13 p.m., Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 6:57:19 AM UTC+11, John S wrote:
On 2/2/2020 5:38 AM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

This is one of the major groups that brought us forward.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYPNjSoDrqw


Yes, I think so. That was a very interesting video.

I remember time-sharing and BASIC as well as Super BASIC. My program
allowed me to design very small high voltage transformers in a few
seconds rather than hours. And other designs as well. That was in the
early 60s.

Note that BASIC still exists in many forms and is very useful for
solving problems quickly. Power Basic comes to mind. I think JL uses it
for several purposes, like for his stock parts inventory.

And people think that climate change denial propaganda is worth propagating.

The fact that you can use BASIC and it it's variants to eventually do what you could do faster with a more appropriate language doesn't make a good choice.

DLUNU was claiming that the invention of BASIC represented some kind of advance. Teaching lots of undergraduates to program was a good idea, but that's it.


That's not unlike saying that teaching kids to read and write was a good
idea, but that's it. Probably just use reading and writing to record
cooking recipes - a waste of time!

It seems to me that allowing the average kid access to computers sparked
a major interest in these machines that would not have developed
anywhere near as fast.

In this matter I might fairly claim that you are the denier...(ducking)

Funny that he doesn't get the entire point of basic & how it changed the world.

The entire point of Basic was that it would run on tiny computers, and it didn't change the world.

Actually Basic originated at Dartmouth as a time share system run on a main frame.
And the article presents it as the first time share system. Time sharing did change the world to some extent.

Dan

The world-changing stuff was done on more powerful computers, with rather better programming languages. NT clearly didn't come into contact with any of that.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, February 5, 2020 at 2:34:37 AM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:f64588f4-cc6c-4b12-
9d88-a142dffaeb6e@googlegroups.com:


BASIC was essentially FORTRAN, cut down to shrink the compiler.


BASIC was NOT a compiled language, you stupid fuck.

An interpreter is just another compiler. The stupidiy is all yours.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Clifford Heath]

On 5/2/20 2:34 am, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:f64588f4-cc6c-4b12-
9d88-a142dffaeb6e@googlegroups.com:
BASIC was essentially FORTRAN, cut down to shrink the compiler.

BASIC was NOT a compiled language, you stupid fuck.

And it did not TRANslate FORMulae, just used a stack to evaluate the
results as it stepped through an expression.

But I think Bill was referring to lexical similarity, and I think I can
see that. It certainly wasn't pretending to be an Algol derivative.

Unfortunately.

CH