Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion The gods of FP
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Nick Maclaren  
View profile  
 More options Aug 27 2003, 3:39 am
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc, comp.object, comp.arch
From: n...@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren)
Date: 27 Aug 2003 07:39:11 GMT
Local: Wed, Aug 27 2003 3:39 am
Subject: Re: The gods of FP
In article <3F4C0B10.5030...@austin.rr.com>,
Artie Gold  <artieg...@austin.rr.com> wrote:

>Michael Meissner wrote:
>> "Donald Roby" <dr...@babsoncourt.com> writes:

>>>They weren't teaching programming to 11 years 40 years ago, but I don't
>>>think I would have been surprised by this either.  Even a naive programmer
>>>can grasp that input statements depend on the input.

>> I dunno, I was 15 years old, 32 years ago when I first learned programming on
>> an IBM 1130 with cards, programming in Fortran.  So I could imagine a few 11
>> year olds learning to program 40 years ago.

>Where?

>Other than the fact that I was fourteen, it sounds frighteningly familiar!

>IIRC, there were five or six schools nationally who had been donated
>1130s (8K memory, pizza-sized 270K removable harddrives, _real_ core
>memory, $90,000 a pop) by IBM in 1969 or so.

(a) 1969 is 34 years ago and (b) those would have been used for
senior students.  40 years ago, probably the only 11 year olds taught
programming (and there were some) were taught by academic parents
who were heavily into computing.

>Of course, given the FP in the subject line of this thread, I remember
>my momentary revulsion at seeing the line:

>x = x + 1

>on the chalkboard.

Yeah.  'x <- x+1' was far better (and '<-' was a single character,
remember?) or even 'x := x+1'.

Regards,
Nick Maclaren.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.