«

> But my english is very bad, I can't be sure.

Grammar and vocabulary is great, I understood your last
post perfectly.

-JKop

JKop wrote:

> Phlip posted:
>
> > Nice to know one can do that. However, it breaks the
> > style guideline
> > "don't re-use a variable for more than one purpose".
>
> I don't recall signing such a contract
>
> There's dozens of bullshit rules out there.

You currently don't write code that others need to maintain, right?

--
Phlip
http://industrialxp.org/community/bi...UserInterfaces

"Julián Albo" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Frederic Banaszak wrote:
>
> > I had also heard that it was a 'backronym', but then I found this:
> > http://www.dartmouth.edu/~vox/0304/0503/basic.html
> >
> > Short of hearing the truth from Kemeny or Kurtz themselves, I'd say it
> > puts that question to rest.
>
> "BASIC (which stands for Beginners' All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code)
> went on to be the most widely used computer language in the world,
> according to Kurtz, bringing computer technology to general audiences."
>
> I don't think that this is a definitine answer: the "according to Kurtz"
> seems to apply to "to be the most widely used computer language in the
> world", not to "(wich stands for...". But my english is very bad, I can't
> be sure.

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.
--
Gary

Phlip posted:

> JKop wrote:
>
>> Phlip posted:
>>
>> > Nice to know one can do that. However, it breaks the
>> > style guideline
>> > "don't re-use a variable for more than one purpose".
>>
>> I don't recall signing such a contract
>>
>> There's dozens of bullshit rules out there.
>
> You currently don't write code that others need to
maintain, right?
>

Nope, self-sufficent, both me *and* my code.

-JKop

Gary Labowitz wrote:

> I'm not quibbling with your parsing. But I was studying BASIC in 1956 (my

Are you sure? According to several sources Basic was designed and
implemented in 1963-64.

--
Salu2

"Julián Albo" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Gary Labowitz wrote:
>
> > I'm not quibbling with your parsing. But I was studying BASIC in 1956
(my
>
> Are you sure? According to several sources Basic was designed and
> implemented in 1963-64.

No, I'm not sure about most things before 1964 (April 7, when IBM launched
the S/360). The reason I identified 1956 was I rather distinctly remember
being in the Rockhurst College library and pulling out a programming book
which I thought was by Kemeny. All may be lost in the "fog of school," so I
won't stand by this. I was also a frequent visitor to the Linda Hall Library
(technical library) and studied many programming theory, history, and
application books there in the early 1960's, so I may have come across it
then and just mix it all up now. But I do stand by having always heard the
acronym.

[An aside: at that time I was heavily into mechanical translation of
languages, but gave up after following the lead of Yngve (Yale?) who
convinced me it was a dead end. I guess it was a right choice. They still
can't translate natural languages with a program.]
--
Gary

"JKop" <> wrote in message
news:ZzF_c.26649$...
> Phlip posted:
>
> > JKop wrote:
> >
> >> Phlip posted:
> >>
> >> > Nice to know one can do that. However, it breaks the
> >> > style guideline
> >> > "don't re-use a variable for more than one purpose".
> >>
> >> I don't recall signing such a contract
> >>
> >> There's dozens of bullshit rules out there.
> >
> > You currently don't write code that others need to
> maintain, right?
> >
>
> Nope, self-sufficent, both me *and* my code.

How wonderful for you. Are you at a University?
--
Gary

Gary Labowitz posted:

> [An aside: at that time I was heavily into mechanical
translation of
> languages, but gave up after following the lead of Yngve
(Yale?) who
> convinced me it was a dead end. I guess it was a right
choice. They
> still can't translate natural languages with a program.]

www.google.com/language_tools

Not perfect, but very good indeed.


-JKop

Gary Labowitz posted:

> "JKop" <> wrote in message
> news:ZzF_c.26649$...
>> Phlip posted:
>>
>> > JKop wrote:
>> >
>> >> Phlip posted:
>> >>
>> >> > Nice to know one can do that. However, it breaks
the
>> >> > style guideline
>> >> > "don't re-use a variable for more than one
purpose".
>> >>
>> >> I don't recall signing such a contract
>> >>
>> >> There's dozens of bullshit rules out there.
>> >
>> > You currently don't write code that others need to
maintain, right?
>> >
>>
>> Nope, self-sufficent, both me *and* my code.
>
> How wonderful for you. Are you at a University?

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.

-JKop

Gary Labowitz wrote:

> Library (technical library) and studied many programming theory, history,
> and application books there in the early 1960's, so I may have come across
> it then and just mix it all up now. But I do stand by having always heard
> the acronym.

Prove the point will be easy, only is needed to find some document of the
early years that mentions the acronym. Demonstrate the contrary will be
harder.

> [An aside: at that time I was heavily into mechanical translation of
> languages, but gave up after following the lead of Yngve (Yale?) who
> convinced me it was a dead end. I guess it was a right choice. They still
> can't translate natural languages with a program.]

I also have always been sceptical about the possible fast progress in that
field, and in voice recognition.

--
Salu2