Counting in binary on ones fingers was something I first ran into at
age 11 when found a book on Military Electronics in a surplus
store. Everything simplified, but in computer section found binary
system explained with using fingers to represent bits. That was
something that I used immediate
I too count sheep with my fingers, but I never get past zero due to the
lack of sheep.:-)
Tom Hunter
On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 5:34 PM Tor Arntsen via cctalk
wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 at 03:27, dwight via cctalk
> wrote:
> > If we'd thought about it we could count to 1023 on our fingers.
>
On 01/02/2021 20:07, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
A US pint of water weighs 1.043 pounds.
One "fluid ounce" (volume) of water weighs 1.043 ounces (weight)!
The nit-picker in me would say "you mean mass", except that there's an
even bigger nit to pick - the density of water is not constant but
Sorry about that. I didn't pay close enough attention to my outgoing
header.
I may use metric when I am measuring things myself, but I got my
motorbike licence in 1991 and my car licence in 2005. I was solely
taught and tested in MPH. For estimating stopping distances by eye, a
metre is a yard, near enough -- and of course "car lengths" and
seconds aren't affected. Keep 2
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 21:07, Fred Cisin via cctalk
wrote:
>
> That is what it MEANS.
> But, it's not quite right. It's off by about 4%.
> A US pint of water weighs 1.043 pounds.
> One "fluid ounce" (volume) of water weighs 1.043 ounces (weight)!
Close enough for government work.
With all the of
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 08:50:56PM -0700, ben via cctalk wrote:
> On 2/1/2021 6:07 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
[...]
>> You're describing a failing in C and similar languages stuck in the
>> 1960s. Here's a Rust method that does add-exposing-carry:
>> https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/std/
On 2/1/2021 6:07 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 02:05:37PM -0700, ben via cctalk wrote:
[...]
I don't see languages in general have improved since the the mid
1960's. Hardware and language models don't reflect each other,
and don't have extendable data sizes and type
On 2/1/2021 12:15 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 20:00, Fred Cisin via cctalk
wrote:
I had always been told, "A pint is a pound, the world around."
Aha! Does that mean a pint of water weighs 1lb?
Interesting. I did not know.
Who Knows?
It just works of beer or ale
reply with the same "Re:".
After 29 "Re: APL\360", the next such msg would have subject line
rewritten to "New topic 1", and the next (up to) 28 "Re: APL\360"
would be similarly re-written (the '28' is decremented for every "Re:
APL\360&quo
On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 08:15:25PM +0100, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 20:00, Fred Cisin via cctalk
> wrote:
>> I had always been told, "A pint is a pound, the world around."
"The world" meaning "the USA", of course.
> Aha! Does that mean a pint of water weighs 1lb?
Yes
On 01/02/2021 20:24, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
Thank heavens that the Brits didn't come out with the 5150--we might
have had to deal with Whitworth (BSW) fasteners.
Nah, too many of them are similar to UNC/UNF, which would have just
caused confusion. We'd have used BA sizes.
--
Pete
Pet
On 01/02/2021 20:07, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
A US pint of water weighs 1.043 pounds.
One "fluid ounce" (volume) of water weighs 1.043 ounces (weight)!
That's also a US measure. An imperial fluid ounce is 28.4ml and
a floz of water weighs 28.4g, same as an avoirdupois ounce. In fact
i
On 2/1/21 12:07 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> Instead, it just means that British pubs are not as stingy with their
> beer. And, it doesn't need to be chilled to almost frozen to make it
> drinkable.
No, as I said, it's that Americans (of the US variety) are authentically
English, using the
From: Chuck Guzis
Numbering of bits in a word is also interesting. Is the high order bit
in a 64 bit word, bit 0 or bit 63? Both conventions have been employed.
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021, John Ames via cctalk wrote:
This one has always boggled me, because it's the one aspect of the
Endian Wars where
I had always been told, "A pint is a pound, the world around."
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
Aha! Does that mean a pint of water weighs 1lb?
Interesting. I did not know.
That is what it MEANS.
But, it's not quite right. It's off by about 4%.
A US pint of water weighs 1.04
> On Feb 1, 2021, at 2:34 PM, Dave Wade G4UGM via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>>> ...
>>> I had always been told, "A pint is a pound, the world around."
>>
>> Aha! Does that mean a pint of water weighs 1lb?
>>
>> Interesting. I did not know.
>
> Typical American statement, where "world" means "Unite
> On Feb 1, 2021, at 2:13 PM, David Bridgham via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> ...
> Sure, one can get into the story that our numbers come from Arabic and
> Arabic is written right-to-left so in fact they were originally
> little-endian and just didn't get flipped around when incorporated into
> left-
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk On Behalf Of Liam Proven via
> cctalk
> Sent: 01 February 2021 19:15
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
>
> Subject: Re: APL\360
>
> On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 20:00, Fred Cisin via cctalk
> wrote:
>
On 2/1/21 1:59 PM, John Ames via cctech wrote:
> This one has always boggled me, because it's the one aspect of the
> Endian Wars where there's a simple, straightforward answer grounded in
> basic mathematics - base ^ digit-number only gives the correct
> place-value when the lowest-order bit is
> From: Chuck Guzis
> Numbering of bits in a word is also interesting. Is the high order bit
> in a 64 bit word, bit 0 or bit 63? Both conventions have been employed.
This one has always boggled me, because it's the one aspect of the
Endian Wars where there's a simple, straightforward answer gro
On 2/1/21 11:00 AM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
>> On 2021-02-01 10:59, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
>>> I do not know what a fluid ounce is, or how many are in a pint.
> On Mon, 1 Feb 2021, emanuel stiebler via cctalk wrote:
>> not enough?
>> ;-)
>
> I had always been told, "A pint is a pound,
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 20:00, Fred Cisin via cctalk
wrote:
>
> I had always been told, "A pint is a pound, the world around."
Aha! Does that mean a pint of water weighs 1lb?
Interesting. I did not know.
> I had already assumed that pub prices had inflated to higher than a pound.
It was under £1
, February 1, 2021 7:59 AM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: APL\360
On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 at 02:56, dwight via cctalk wrote:
> I constantly see people claiming how much better decimal is than the English
> system of meassurment.
Um. I am a native English speaker, a
On 2021-02-01 10:59, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
I do not know what a fluid ounce is, or how many are in a pint.
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021, emanuel stiebler via cctalk wrote:
not enough?
;-)
I had always been told, "A pint is a pound, the world around."
I had already assumed that pub prices had in
We don't need another big-endian/little-endian battle
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
Little-endian tends to be more useful when doing multi-word arithmetic.
Big-endian is handy for text and human-readable numbers. That there are
heated arguments over which endianness is bes
On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 at 03:27, dwight via cctalk wrote:
If we'd thought about it we could count to 1023 on our fingers.
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021, Tor Arntsen via cctalk wrote:
Some sheep herders in (IIRC) the Caucasus do, or did at least. I
learned about that some decades ago. Counting sheep on thei
On 2021-02-01 11:40, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
> Whose pint? UK Imperial pint = 568 ml. US liquid pint = 473 ml.
That explains some conversations I had with people there ;-)
On 2/1/21 5:26 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
> On every CPU I've used, LSB has always been bit 0. Unlike endianness, this
> is clearly better than the other way round since the value is 2**bit_number
> and the bit number doesn't change if the value is converted into a different
> word width.
It's actually 568.26. Easy to work out, in Canada the gallon is defined
as being 454609 ten millionths of a cubic metre,
Nigel
Nigel Johnson, MSc., MIEEE, MCSE VE3ID/G4AJQ/VA3MCU
Amateur Radio, the origin of the open-source concept!
Skype: TILBURY2591 nw.john...@ieee.org
On 2021-02-01 11:40
On 2/1/21 8:10 AM, emanuel stiebler via cctalk wrote:
> On 2021-02-01 10:59, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
>> I do not know what a fluid ounce is, or how many are in a pint.
>
> not enough?
> ;-)
>
Whose pint? UK Imperial pint = 568 ml. US liquid pint = 473 ml.
Both are one-eighth of a gall
On 2021-02-01 10:59, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> I do not know what a fluid ounce is, or how many are in a pint.
not enough?
;-)
On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 at 02:56, dwight via cctalk wrote:
> I constantly see people claiming how much better decimal is than the English
> system of meassurment.
Um. I am a native English speaker, as well as an English citizen, and
I count in decimal.
Do you mean metric (SI / Systeme Internationa
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 22:14, Fred Cisin via cctalk
wrote:
> such as 42
> WHATDOYOUGETWHENYOUMULTIPLYSIXBYNINE
👍
--
Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamprov
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 01:12:55PM -0800, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> Most old (pre S/360) digit/character-addressable architectures were
> big-endian (i.e. higher-order characters occupied lower addresses)
> Even PDP-11 isn't strictly little-endian, though Intel X86 definitely is.
I not
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 10:34, Tor Arntsen via cctalk
wrote:
>
> Some sheep herders in (IIRC) the Caucasus do, or did at least. I
> learned about that some decades ago. Counting sheep on their fingers.
> I use the system sometimes.
Fred Pohl's short story "Digits and Dastards" explains it well.
I
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 02:05:37PM -0700, ben via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> I don't see languages in general have improved since the the mid
> 1960's. Hardware and language models don't reflect each other,
> and don't have extendable data sizes and types.
> PL/I seems to have been the best,but too tied
On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 at 03:27, dwight via cctalk wrote:
> If we'd thought about it we could count to 1023 on our fingers.
> Dwight
Some sheep herders in (IIRC) the Caucasus do, or did at least. I
learned about that some decades ago. Counting sheep on their fingers.
I use the system sometimes.
-To
It was thus said that the Great Bill Gunshannon via cctalk once stated:
> On 1/29/21 4:12 PM, Will Cooke via cctalk wrote:
> >
> >>On 01/29/2021 2:58 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> >>
> >
> >>'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error, and
> >>which the compiler doesn't
On 1/30/21 1:57 PM, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
On 30/01/2021 12:45, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
On 1/29/21 4:25 PM, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
On 01/29/21 15:58, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote (in part):
'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error,
and which t
On 1/30/21 1:38 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> Actually, that was Chuck who said that "there be monsters" when
> languages use whitespace rather than punctuation to denote boundaries.
And then there's "make", where a hard tab must be used for indentation,
unless it's a recipe, then spaces must
Actually, that was Chuck who said that "there be monsters" when languages
use whitespace rather than punctuation to denote boundaries.
I use both indentation for my readability AND brackets to be explicit.
Consider:
if condition
{ do this;
do that;
}
VS:
if (condition)
do this;
do that
On 1/30/21 9:52 AM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
On 1/29/21 10:03 PM, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
And unfortunately some industries it is prohibited. Those industries
*require* conformance to MISRA, CERT-C, ISO-26262 and others. There is
*no* choice since the code has to be audited and
On 30/01/2021 12:45, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
On 1/29/21 4:25 PM, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
On 01/29/21 15:58, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote (in part):
'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error,
and which the compiler doesn't catch:
if (x = 3) . . .  /*
> On 01/30/2021 11:50 AM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>
> On 1/29/21 6:08 PM, Sean Conner via cctalk wrote:
> > It was thus said that the Great Will Cooke via cctalk once stated:
> > >
> >>> On 01/29/2021 4:42 PM David Barto via cctalk
> >>> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Whenever I start a new
On 1/29/21 9:19 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
On 1/29/21 5:55 PM, dwight via cctalk wrote:
My problem with words such as DAA is that I constantly have to look them up to
see exactly what they actually do. Finding alternate uses it all about knowing
what they actually do. I know what they w
On 1/29/21 10:03 PM, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
>
> And unfortunately some industries it is prohibited. Those industries
> *require* conformance to MISRA, CERT-C, ISO-26262 and others. There is
> *no* choice since the code has to be audited and compliance is *not*
> optional.
Just an illu
On 1/29/21 6:08 PM, Sean Conner via cctalk wrote:
It was thus said that the Great Will Cooke via cctalk once stated:
On 01/29/2021 4:42 PM David Barto via cctalk wrote:
Whenever I start a new job the first thing I do today is enable -Werror;
all warnings are errors. And I’ll fix every one.
> On 01/30/2021 11:42 AM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
> > Modern Visual Studio and GCC both flag the "=" in a condition, I believe.
> > But if you're shipping code with 260+ warnings, who would see one more.
> And the problem here is really quite plain and simple.
> Why are you shippin
On 1/29/21 4:25 PM, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
On 01/29/21 15:58, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote (in part):
'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error,
and which the compiler doesn't catch:
if (x = 3) . . . /* sets x to 3 and gives TRUE for the condition */
I imagine
On 1/29/21 4:12 PM, Will Cooke via cctalk wrote:
On 01/29/2021 2:58 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error, and
which the compiler doesn't catch:
if (x = 3) . . . /* sets x to 3 and gives TRUE for the condition */
I imagine that t
On 1/29/21 2:20 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
BTW, I don't really know Hebrew but doesn't it still write math LTR?
I know they write numbers that way.
CAREFUL.
We don't need another BIG-endian/little-endian debate!
(when a 16 bit number i
> On Jan 29, 2021, at 8:27 PM, dwight via cctalk wrote:
>
> [EXTERNAL EMAIL]
>
> If we'd thought about it we could count to 1023 on our fingers.
> Dwight
My kids actually do that (because I did think about it when they were growing
up). And not just to impress me, I was watching the elder daug
detective skills, guess
which product...]
From: "cctalk"
To: "cctalk"
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 6:57:28 PM
Subject: Re: APL\360
It was thus said that the Great Norman Jaffe via cctalk once stated:
>
> It happened to me as well - I found hundreds of warnings
On 1/29/21 4:32 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
if ( !(myfile = fopen( filename, "r"))
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
In a lot of industry standard coding practices (MISRA, CERT-C) that
type of statement is prohibited and *will* result in an error being
reported by th
It was thus said that the Great Norman Jaffe via cctalk once stated:
>
> It happened to me as well - I found hundreds of warnings in the code and,
> after getting permission to address them, I was fired
Wait ... you got *permission* and were still *fired*? Have I just been
fortunate in where
It was thus said that the Great Fred Cisin via cctalk once stated:
> >Whenever I start a new job the first thing I do today is enable
> >-Werror; all warnings are errors. And I’ll fix every one. Even
> >when everyone claims that “These are not a problem”. Before
> >that existed, I’d do the same wit
> On 01/29/2021 7:55 PM dwight via cctalk wrote:
>
>
> I constantly see people claiming how much better decimal is than the English
> system of meassurment. I don't really think that much of the decimal number
> system. If we'd only been born with 8 fingers on each hand, computers would
> h
On Sat, 30 Jan 2021, dwight via cctalk wrote:
If we'd thought about it we could count to 1023 on our fingers.
If the more dominant/aggressive of our ancestors had come from warmer
climates where feet don't stink too much to expose in public, then we
could have had 20 binary digits.
On 1/29/21 4:13 PM, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
> In a lot of industry standard coding practices (MISRA, CERT-C) that type
> of statement is prohibited and *will* result in an error being reported
> by the checker/scanner.
>
> The if statement in your example has at least 2 errors from MISRA's
If we'd thought about it we could count to 1023 on our fingers.
Dwight
From: cctalk on behalf of Chuck Guzis via
cctalk
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 6:19 PM
To: dwight via cctalk
Subject: Re: APL\360
On 1/29/21 5:55 PM, dwight via cctalk wrote:
On 1/29/21 5:55 PM, dwight via cctalk wrote:
> My problem with words such as DAA is that I constantly have to look them up
> to see exactly what they actually do. Finding alternate uses it all about
> knowing what they actually do. I know what they were put there for ( to keep
> banker happy ).
we'd known.
Dwight
From: cctalk on behalf of Fred Cisin via cctalk
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 4:32 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: APL\360
>>> if ( !(myfile = fopen( filename, "r"))
On Fri, 29
if ( !(myfile = fopen( filename, "r"))
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
In a lot of industry standard coding practices (MISRA, CERT-C) that type of
statement is prohibited and *will* result in an error being reported by the
checker/scanner.
The if statement in your example
On 30/01/2021 00:13, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
In a lot of industry standard coding practices (MISRA, CERT-C) that
type of statement is prohibited and *will* result in an error being
reported by the checker/scanner.
The if statement in your example has at least 2 errors from MISRA's
per
In a lot of industry standard coding practices (MISRA, CERT-C) that type
of statement is prohibited and *will* result in an error being reported
by the checker/scanner.
The if statement in your example has at least 2 errors from MISRA's
perspective:
* assignment within a conditional stateme
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
In the past (and occasionally today, I use the following construct:
FILE *myfile;
if ( !(myfile = fopen( filename, "r"))
{
fprintf( stderr, "Couldn\'t open %s - exiting\n", filename);
exit (1);
}
Yes, it only saves a line, but neatly descri
In the past (and occasionally today, I use the following construct:
FILE *myfile;
if ( !(myfile = fopen( filename, "r"))
{
fprintf( stderr, "Couldn\'t open %s - exiting\n", filename);
exit (1);
}
Yes, it only saves a line, but neatly describes what's being done.
--Chuck
Whenever I start a new job the first thing I do today is enable
-Werror; all warnings are errors. And I’ll fix every one. Even
when everyone claims that “These are not a problem”. Before
that existed, I’d do the same with lint, and FlexeLint when I
could get it.
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, wrco...@wrco
On 1/29/2021 1:58 PM, Fred Cisin wrote:
You COULD design a language around your favorite pseudo-code structures
I did that already, since I can not find a easy to port C compiler
with structures, and a small memory footprint like 64Kb. I found LCC 3.x
off a old CD rom archive, but I can't fi
refuse to have their product on any system that I have involvement with...
From: "cctalk"
To: "cctalk"
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 3:08:28 PM
Subject: Re: APL\360
It was thus said that the Great Will Cooke via cctalk once stated:
>
> > On 01/29/202
> On 01/29/2021 5:08 PM Sean Conner via cctalk wrote:
>
> >
> WHY? Why would you get fired for fixing warnings? Would it make some
> manager upstream look bad or something?
>
> -spc
Because the code was so fragile and "worked" that making the code "correct" was
likely to break it.
"A person
It was thus said that the Great Will Cooke via cctalk once stated:
>
> > On 01/29/2021 4:42 PM David Barto via cctalk wrote:
>
> > Whenever I start a new job the first thing I do today is enable -Werror;
> > all warnings are errors. And I’ll fix every one. Even when everyone
> > claims that “The
> On 01/29/2021 4:42 PM David Barto via cctalk wrote:
>
> Whenever I start a new job the first thing I do today is enable -Werror; all
> warnings are errors. And I’ll fix every one. Even when everyone claims that
> “These are not a problem”. Before that existed, I’d do the same with lint,
>
> On Jan 29, 2021, at 2:08 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, wrco...@wrcooke.net wrote:
>> Modern Visual Studio and GCC both flag the "=" in a condition, I believe.
>> But if you're shipping code with 260+ warnings, who would see one more.
>
> In some cases, it is
'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error, and
which the compiler doesn't catch:
if (x = 3) . . . /* sets x to 3 and gives TRUE for the condition */
I imagine that there are probably some pre-processors that would return a
WARNING for it.
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, wrco...@wrc
On 01/29/21 15:58, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote (in part):
'=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error,
and which the compiler doesn't catch:
if (x = 3) . . . /* sets x to 3 and gives TRUE for the condition */
I imagine that there are probably some pre-processors that wou
On 1/29/21 12:58 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
>>> Without OTHER changes in parsing arithmetic expressions, that may or
> I like indentation, and demanded it from my students.
> while (k)
> { if (foo)
> { ..do this thing
> ..do that thing
> }
> else
> { ..something he
Early versions of BASIC had a keyword "LET". LET X = 3 is devoid of
most of the ambiguity, and LET 3 = X is much less likely to be
attempted. 'Course, changing the values of constants opens up some
strange possibilities!
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
SUBROUTINE FOO(X)
On 1/29/21 11:40 AM, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
> On 29/01/2021 14:20, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
>> We don't need another BIG-endian/little-endian debate!
>> (when a 16 bit number is stored in bytes, does the high order byte
>> come first, or the low order byte?) (cf. intel V Motorola)
> Am
> On 01/29/2021 2:58 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
>
> '=' and '==' makes possible what is probably the most common error, and
> which the compiler doesn't catch:
> if (x = 3) . . . /* sets x to 3 and gives TRUE for the condition */
> I imagine that there are probably some pre-processors tha
On 1/29/21 11:59 AM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> Early versions of BASIC had a keyword "LET". LET X = 3 is devoid of
> most of the ambiguity, and LET 3 = X is much less likely to be
> attempted. 'Course, changing the values of constants opens up some
> strange possibilities!
SUBROUTINE FO
Without OTHER changes in parsing arithmetic expressions, that may or may
not be warranted, just replacing the '=' being used for assignment with an
arrow ELIMINATED that particular confusion. Well, mostly. You can't use
a right pointing arrow to fix 3 = X
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, ben via cctalk
On 1/29/21 12:21 PM, ben via cctalk wrote:
On 1/29/2021 12:59 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
Without OTHER changes in parsing arithmetic expressions, that may or
may not be warranted, just replacing the '=' being used for
assignment with an arrow ELIMINATED that particular confusion. We
On 1/29/2021 12:59 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
Without OTHER changes in parsing arithmetic expressions, that may or may
not be warranted, just replacing the '=' being used for assignment with
an arrow ELIMINATED that particular confusion. Well, mostly. You can't
use a right pointing a
We don't need another BIG-endian/little-endian debate!
(when a 16 bit number is stored in bytes, does the high order byte come
first, or the low order byte?) (cf. intel V Motorola)
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
Amen to that (but did it not originate with DEC vs. IBM?)
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
Well, part of the confusion lies in the difference of "=" in mathematics
indicating a property or state, as opposed to computer languages using
it as an operator. It's a subtle distinction, but important.
D = 4AC in mathematics establishes a pro
On 1/29/2021 8:19 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 13:11, Peter Corlett via cctalk
wrote:
It is *also* the use of symbols. Firstly, some people are just symbol-blind
and prefer stuff spelled out in words. It's just how brains are wired.
Agreed. I submit this is also w
On 29/01/2021 14:20, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
We don't need another BIG-endian/little-endian debate!
(when a 16 bit number is stored in bytes, does the high order byte
come first, or the low order byte?) (cf. intel V Motorola)
Amen to that (but did it not originate with DEC vs. IBM?)
N.
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
BTW, I don't really know Hebrew but doesn't it still write math LTR? I know
they write numbers that way.
CAREFUL.
We don't need another BIG-endian/little-endian debate!
(when a 16 bit number is stored in bytes, does the high order byte come
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 11:21:11AM -0500, Nemo Nusquam via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> In 1999, a fellow student in a UML course worked for a large information
> company (Reuters, I think?) and told me that they had embarked on an
> expensive s/w conversion project. Their back-end systems were implemente
> On Jan 29, 2021, at 12:12 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On 1/29/21 6:27 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>
>> True, although right to left is not a natural way to read mathematical
>> formulas. The reason APL uses right to left is that the designers
>> apparently were unwilli
On Friday, January 29, 2021, 10:19:54 AM EST, Liam Proven via cctalk
wrote:
>On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 13:11, Peter Corlett via cctalk
>wrote:
>>
>> It is *also* the use of symbols. Firstly, some people are just symbol-blind
>> and prefer stuff spelled out in words. It's just how brains are wired
On 1/29/21 6:27 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
> True, although right to left is not a natural way to read mathematical
> formulas. The reason APL uses right to left is that the designers apparently
> were unwilling to change the direction of the assignment operator, so
> everything else ha
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 13:11, Peter Corlett via cctalk
wrote:
>
> It is *also* the use of symbols. Firstly, some people are just symbol-blind
> and prefer stuff spelled out in words. It's just how brains are wired.
Agreed. I submit this is also why some people find Lisp (and perhaps
Forth and Pos
On 1/29/21 7:27 AM, Gavin Scott via cctalk wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 6:11 AM Peter Corlett via cctalk
wrote:
Secondly, beyond BODMAS, the meaning and precedence of random symbols is
unclear to casual readers.
An issue that plagues other operator-rich languages, but not APL since
APL foll
> On Jan 29, 2021, at 7:27 AM, Gavin Scott via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 6:11 AM Peter Corlett via cctalk
> wrote:
>> Secondly, beyond BODMAS, the meaning and precedence of random symbols is
>> unclear to casual readers.
>
> An issue that plagues other operator-rich langua
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 6:11 AM Peter Corlett via cctalk
wrote:
> Secondly, beyond BODMAS, the meaning and precedence of random symbols is
> unclear to casual readers.
An issue that plagues other operator-rich languages, but not APL since
APL follows a strict right-to-left evaluation order for AL
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 07:43:13PM -0800, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> APL was difficult for those used to traditional programming languages, not
> primarily because of the character set, but because it's basically a
> vector/matrix programming language.
It is *also* the use of symbols. F
On 1/20/2021 10:16 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
Learning many different paradigms makes it easier to and more
likely that you will choose the right tool for the job. In
the world of general purpose languages all you have is a hammer
and so all tasks look like nails.
bill
I don't s
1 - 100 of 146 matches
Mail list logo
