For Sale: Bike, Bike, Bike, Bike, Frame, and wheels.
- Thread starter gplama
- Start date
T
TimC
Guest
On 2007-06-21, cfsmtb (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
> gplama Wrote:
>> ....? Do tell...
>
> After a good nights sleep I've re-considered my opinion regarding this.
> It was merely a passing thought, now idly dismissed.
You weren't reconsidering N+1, were you?
--
TimC
I haven't lost my mind -- it's backed up on tape somewhere. --unknown
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
> gplama Wrote:
>> ....? Do tell...
>
> After a good nights sleep I've re-considered my opinion regarding this.
> It was merely a passing thought, now idly dismissed.
You weren't reconsidering N+1, were you?
--
TimC
I haven't lost my mind -- it's backed up on tape somewhere. --unknown
D
Donga
Guest
On Jun 21, 3:11 pm, cfsmtb <cfsmtb.2si...@no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
> TimC Wrote:
> > You weren't reconsidering N+1, were you?
>
> Nah, the bloke wouldn't stand for it. How many people have a lovely
> partner like that?
>
> --
> cfsmtb
Well I have, but I'm still too chicken to tell her about my new ride!
The other night I'd fitted the seat and bars, but not the wheels. To
test the spacing, I put the bike down on the BB shell and sat on it.
She chose this moment to stick her head out the door and ask what I
was doing - and saw me sitting on a bike without wheels. Well, if she
thought I was soft in the head before ... She hasn't mentioned it ...
what a goddess.
donga
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
> TimC Wrote:
> > You weren't reconsidering N+1, were you?
>
> Nah, the bloke wouldn't stand for it. How many people have a lovely
> partner like that?
>
> --
> cfsmtb
Well I have, but I'm still too chicken to tell her about my new ride!
The other night I'd fitted the seat and bars, but not the wheels. To
test the spacing, I put the bike down on the BB shell and sat on it.
She chose this moment to stick her head out the door and ask what I
was doing - and saw me sitting on a bike without wheels. Well, if she
thought I was soft in the head before ... She hasn't mentioned it ...
what a goddess.
donga
D
Donga
Guest
On Jun 21, 4:25 pm, cfsmtb <cfsmtb.2si...@no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
> Donga Wrote:
>
>
>
> > Well I have, but I'm still too chicken to tell her about my new ride!
>
> Ahhhhhh, the SS? New bike! New bike!
>
> Do tell.
>
> --
> cfsmtb
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb275/pjlwbike/LSClassic2.jpg
You like? I love.
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
> Donga Wrote:
>
>
>
> > Well I have, but I'm still too chicken to tell her about my new ride!
>
> Ahhhhhh, the SS? New bike! New bike!
>
> Do tell.
>
> --
> cfsmtb
http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb275/pjlwbike/LSClassic2.jpg
You like? I love.
J
John Pitts
Guest
On 2007-06-20, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
> load "linux",8,1
Thanks Tim. You made my day.
--
John
> load "linux",8,1
Thanks Tim. You made my day.
--
John
2
20cents
Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
John Pitts <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2007-06-20, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > load "linux",8,1
>
> Thanks Tim. You made my day.
I was surprised to see this during the week:
June 21, 2007 The programming language Fortran celebrates its 50th
anniversary this year. A proposal from IBM employee John Backus to
develop an efficient alternative to assembly language for programming
the company¹s IBM 704 mainframe computer in 1953 resulted in the first
specification for the IBM Mathematical FORmula TRANslating System in
1956. The first FORTRAN compiler appeared in April 1957.
cheers,
Darryl
John Pitts <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2007-06-20, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > load "linux",8,1
>
> Thanks Tim. You made my day.
I was surprised to see this during the week:
June 21, 2007 The programming language Fortran celebrates its 50th
anniversary this year. A proposal from IBM employee John Backus to
develop an efficient alternative to assembly language for programming
the company¹s IBM 704 mainframe computer in 1953 resulted in the first
specification for the IBM Mathematical FORmula TRANslating System in
1956. The first FORTRAN compiler appeared in April 1957.
cheers,
Darryl
T
TimC
Guest
On 2007-06-23, 20cents (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> John Pitts <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 2007-06-20, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > load "linux",8,1
Shouldn't that be lunix, anyway?
I've never actually seen lunix in operation, but then again, I don't
have a C64 anymore.
>> Thanks Tim. You made my day.
>
> I was surprised to see this during the week:
>
> June 21, 2007 The programming language Fortran celebrates its 50th
> anniversary this year. A proposal from IBM employee John Backus to
> develop an efficient alternative to assembly language for programming
> the company¹s IBM 704 mainframe computer in 1953 resulted in the first
> specification for the IBM Mathematical FORmula TRANslating System in
> 1956. The first FORTRAN compiler appeared in April 1957.
Backus died a few weeks ago
I've already used Fortran 2003 features in my last couple of Fortran
programs I've modified. Good thing the compilers are reasonably up to
date on the standard.
--
TimC
I am very new to programming drivers so if I sound un-knowledgeable then it's
because I am. -- first4internet's Ceri Coburn on writing Sony's DRM rootkit
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> John Pitts <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 2007-06-20, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > load "linux",8,1
Shouldn't that be lunix, anyway?
I've never actually seen lunix in operation, but then again, I don't
have a C64 anymore.
>> Thanks Tim. You made my day.
>
> I was surprised to see this during the week:
>
> June 21, 2007 The programming language Fortran celebrates its 50th
> anniversary this year. A proposal from IBM employee John Backus to
> develop an efficient alternative to assembly language for programming
> the company¹s IBM 704 mainframe computer in 1953 resulted in the first
> specification for the IBM Mathematical FORmula TRANslating System in
> 1956. The first FORTRAN compiler appeared in April 1957.
Backus died a few weeks ago
I've already used Fortran 2003 features in my last couple of Fortran
programs I've modified. Good thing the compilers are reasonably up to
date on the standard.
--
TimC
I am very new to programming drivers so if I sound un-knowledgeable then it's
because I am. -- first4internet's Ceri Coburn on writing Sony's DRM rootkit
Z
Zebee Johnstone
Guest
In aus.bicycle on Sat, 23 Jun 2007 05:16:33 GMT
20cents <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I was surprised to see this during the week:
>
> June 21, 2007 The programming language Fortran celebrates its 50th
> anniversary this year. A proposal from IBM employee John Backus to
> develop an efficient alternative to assembly language for programming
> the company¹s IBM 704 mainframe computer in 1953 resulted in the first
> specification for the IBM Mathematical FORmula TRANslating System in
> 1956. The first FORTRAN compiler appeared in April 1957.
If it's the anniversary of Fortran than I suppose it is time for the
bi-annual prediction of the death of COBOL.
Zebee
20cents <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I was surprised to see this during the week:
>
> June 21, 2007 The programming language Fortran celebrates its 50th
> anniversary this year. A proposal from IBM employee John Backus to
> develop an efficient alternative to assembly language for programming
> the company¹s IBM 704 mainframe computer in 1953 resulted in the first
> specification for the IBM Mathematical FORmula TRANslating System in
> 1956. The first FORTRAN compiler appeared in April 1957.
If it's the anniversary of Fortran than I suppose it is time for the
bi-annual prediction of the death of COBOL.
Zebee
J
John Pitts
Guest
On 2007-06-23, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2007-06-23, 20cents (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> John Pitts <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2007-06-20, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> > load "linux",8,1
>
> Shouldn't that be lunix, anyway?
>
> I've never actually seen lunix in operation, but then again, I don't
> have a C64 anymore.
>
Ooh, I wasn't even aware of lunix. Just had a quick google, and it's
real! I was laughing at the absurdity of Linux running on a C64. Not
so absurd, it seems...
The most fun I had with my C64 was with the Forth cartridge that I
bought. Which included a reverse-polish assembler.
Speaking of which, do you astronomy Johnnies still use Forth for
controlling telescopes? ISTR it was the language of choice at one
stage.
> I've already used Fortran 2003 features in my last couple of Fortran
> programs I've modified. Good thing the compilers are reasonably up to
> date on the standard.
>
Bleh. In my first year of uni, they taught us Fortran IV as an
introduction to programming. Scarred me for life. I haven't used
Fortran since.
--
John
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
> On 2007-06-23, 20cents (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> John Pitts <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2007-06-20, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> > load "linux",8,1
>
> Shouldn't that be lunix, anyway?
>
> I've never actually seen lunix in operation, but then again, I don't
> have a C64 anymore.
>
Ooh, I wasn't even aware of lunix. Just had a quick google, and it's
real! I was laughing at the absurdity of Linux running on a C64. Not
so absurd, it seems...
The most fun I had with my C64 was with the Forth cartridge that I
bought. Which included a reverse-polish assembler.
Speaking of which, do you astronomy Johnnies still use Forth for
controlling telescopes? ISTR it was the language of choice at one
stage.
> I've already used Fortran 2003 features in my last couple of Fortran
> programs I've modified. Good thing the compilers are reasonably up to
> date on the standard.
>
Bleh. In my first year of uni, they taught us Fortran IV as an
introduction to programming. Scarred me for life. I haven't used
Fortran since.
--
John
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
T
TimC
Guest
On 2007-06-23, John Pitts (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> On 2007-06-23, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2007-06-23, 20cents (aka Bruce)
>> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> John Pitts <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2007-06-20, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > load "linux",8,1
>>
>> Shouldn't that be lunix, anyway?
>>
>> I've never actually seen lunix in operation, but then again, I don't
>> have a C64 anymore.
>
> Ooh, I wasn't even aware of lunix. Just had a quick google, and it's
> real! I was laughing at the absurdity of Linux running on a C64. Not
> so absurd, it seems...
Oh, I wouldn't go so far as to say it's not absurd.
> The most fun I had with my C64 was with the Forth cartridge that I
> bought. Which included a reverse-polish assembler.
>
> Speaking of which, do you astronomy Johnnies still use Forth for
> controlling telescopes? ISTR it was the language of choice at one
> stage.
Our telescope is running off a 35 year old Interdata, running a large
number of compiled FORTRAN routines. We are currently in the midst of
rewriting it (because we are on the last of our spare 2MB disk packs,
and no more working models are known in the world) in C I think. The
new system has an on-sky test scheduled in a month, but the new
hardware hasn't been installed yet! It's a pain when you have to
apply for on-sky time 6 months in advance.
>> I've already used Fortran 2003 features in my last couple of Fortran
>> programs I've modified. Good thing the compilers are reasonably up to
>> date on the standard.
>>
>
> Bleh. In my first year of uni, they taught us Fortran IV as an
> introduction to programming. Scarred me for life. I haven't used
> Fortran since.
Fortran has improved since 1966! Unlike COBOL.
It's been hard to ride around here for the past couple of weeks. I
slipped on black ice as I was walking from the bus up the top.
--
TimC
The prolonged application of polysyllabic vocabulary infallibly
exercises a deleterious influence on the fecundity of expression,
rendering the ultimate tendancy apocryphal. --unknown
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> On 2007-06-23, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2007-06-23, 20cents (aka Bruce)
>> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> John Pitts <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2007-06-20, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > load "linux",8,1
>>
>> Shouldn't that be lunix, anyway?
>>
>> I've never actually seen lunix in operation, but then again, I don't
>> have a C64 anymore.
>
> Ooh, I wasn't even aware of lunix. Just had a quick google, and it's
> real! I was laughing at the absurdity of Linux running on a C64. Not
> so absurd, it seems...
Oh, I wouldn't go so far as to say it's not absurd.
> The most fun I had with my C64 was with the Forth cartridge that I
> bought. Which included a reverse-polish assembler.
>
> Speaking of which, do you astronomy Johnnies still use Forth for
> controlling telescopes? ISTR it was the language of choice at one
> stage.
Our telescope is running off a 35 year old Interdata, running a large
number of compiled FORTRAN routines. We are currently in the midst of
rewriting it (because we are on the last of our spare 2MB disk packs,
and no more working models are known in the world) in C I think. The
new system has an on-sky test scheduled in a month, but the new
hardware hasn't been installed yet! It's a pain when you have to
apply for on-sky time 6 months in advance.
>> I've already used Fortran 2003 features in my last couple of Fortran
>> programs I've modified. Good thing the compilers are reasonably up to
>> date on the standard.
>>
>
> Bleh. In my first year of uni, they taught us Fortran IV as an
> introduction to programming. Scarred me for life. I haven't used
> Fortran since.
Fortran has improved since 1966! Unlike COBOL.
It's been hard to ride around here for the past couple of weeks. I
slipped on black ice as I was walking from the bus up the top.
--
TimC
The prolonged application of polysyllabic vocabulary infallibly
exercises a deleterious influence on the fecundity of expression,
rendering the ultimate tendancy apocryphal. --unknown
J
John Pitts
Guest
On 2007-06-23, TimC <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2007-06-23, John Pitts (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>>
>> Ooh, I wasn't even aware of lunix. Just had a quick google, and it's
>> real! I was laughing at the absurdity of Linux running on a C64. Not
>> so absurd, it seems...
>
> Oh, I wouldn't go so far as to say it's not absurd.
Heh.
> Our telescope is running off a 35 year old Interdata, running a large
> number of compiled FORTRAN routines. We are currently in the midst of
> rewriting it (because we are on the last of our spare 2MB disk packs,
> and no more working models are known in the world) in C I think. The
> new system has an on-sky test scheduled in a month, but the new
> hardware hasn't been installed yet! It's a pain when you have to
> apply for on-sky time 6 months in advance.
When it stops working you'll have all the on-sky time you want, Shirley.
>> Bleh. In my first year of uni, they taught us Fortran IV as an
>> introduction to programming. Scarred me for life. I haven't used
>> Fortran since.
>
> Fortran has improved since 1966! Unlike COBOL.
So I've heard. Still quite happy to avoid it. I don't know why they
thought it'd be a good thing to teach first-years, but the textbook was
written by the lecturer's father, ISTR. They switched to Pascal and
structured programming the year after.
> It's been hard to ride around here for the past couple of weeks. I
> slipped on black ice as I was walking from the bus up the top.
It's been cold enough down here on the plains. It was difficult to get
out of bed for this morning's BUG ride (but worth the effort once on the
road.)
--
John
"Hear no evil, see no evil, two out of three ain't bad."
-- Mad Magazine
> On 2007-06-23, John Pitts (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>>
>> Ooh, I wasn't even aware of lunix. Just had a quick google, and it's
>> real! I was laughing at the absurdity of Linux running on a C64. Not
>> so absurd, it seems...
>
> Oh, I wouldn't go so far as to say it's not absurd.
Heh.
> Our telescope is running off a 35 year old Interdata, running a large
> number of compiled FORTRAN routines. We are currently in the midst of
> rewriting it (because we are on the last of our spare 2MB disk packs,
> and no more working models are known in the world) in C I think. The
> new system has an on-sky test scheduled in a month, but the new
> hardware hasn't been installed yet! It's a pain when you have to
> apply for on-sky time 6 months in advance.
When it stops working you'll have all the on-sky time you want, Shirley.
>> Bleh. In my first year of uni, they taught us Fortran IV as an
>> introduction to programming. Scarred me for life. I haven't used
>> Fortran since.
>
> Fortran has improved since 1966! Unlike COBOL.
So I've heard. Still quite happy to avoid it. I don't know why they
thought it'd be a good thing to teach first-years, but the textbook was
written by the lecturer's father, ISTR. They switched to Pascal and
structured programming the year after.
> It's been hard to ride around here for the past couple of weeks. I
> slipped on black ice as I was walking from the bus up the top.
It's been cold enough down here on the plains. It was difficult to get
out of bed for this morning's BUG ride (but worth the effort once on the
road.)
--
John
"Hear no evil, see no evil, two out of three ain't bad."
-- Mad Magazine
T
Terryc
Guest
John Pitts wrote:
>
> So I've heard. Still quite happy to avoid it. I don't know why they
> thought it'd be a good thing to teach first-years,
Career opportunities.
I believe it still has the largest installed base in the world.
>
> So I've heard. Still quite happy to avoid it. I don't know why they
> thought it'd be a good thing to teach first-years,
Career opportunities.
I believe it still has the largest installed base in the world.
Z
Zebee Johnstone
Guest
In aus.bicycle on Sun, 24 Jun 2007 19:26:43 +1000
Terryc <[email protected]> wrote:
> John Pitts wrote:
>
>>
>> So I've heard. Still quite happy to avoid it. I don't know why they
>> thought it'd be a good thing to teach first-years,
>
> Career opportunities.
> I believe it still has the largest installed base in the world.
That's what they told us. Each year's intake was allotted COBOL or
Fortran, simply because it was a good bet we'd come across one or the
other. It wasn't about teaching programming per se or data
structures, it was about "you will meet this one day, better get used
to it."
My Advanced COBOL tutor used the unit as an opportunity to teach us
about code specification pitfalls. THe entire tutorial group failed
the first assignment for small things like indent and variable names
and larger things user input decisions. When we complained he hadn't
said anything about any of that, he just smiled and said "you didn't ask".
So after that, we hammered out the requirements for every assignment.
If we could think of something and get a ruling, he'd stick to that
ruling but if he could think of something we didn't, then he'd decide
arbitrarily (usually as in "pick the answer so the maximum number of
people lose marks") what the spec would be and mark accordingly. This,
of course, included any fuzziness in the agreed upon rulings.
A very good practical education in carefully reading what you have
been given and thinking about all the possible difficulties. And of
course in dealing with a deliberately obtuse and difficult customer.
One of the best tutorial experiences I had in 10 years and 3 universities.
Zebee
Terryc <[email protected]> wrote:
> John Pitts wrote:
>
>>
>> So I've heard. Still quite happy to avoid it. I don't know why they
>> thought it'd be a good thing to teach first-years,
>
> Career opportunities.
> I believe it still has the largest installed base in the world.
That's what they told us. Each year's intake was allotted COBOL or
Fortran, simply because it was a good bet we'd come across one or the
other. It wasn't about teaching programming per se or data
structures, it was about "you will meet this one day, better get used
to it."
My Advanced COBOL tutor used the unit as an opportunity to teach us
about code specification pitfalls. THe entire tutorial group failed
the first assignment for small things like indent and variable names
and larger things user input decisions. When we complained he hadn't
said anything about any of that, he just smiled and said "you didn't ask".
So after that, we hammered out the requirements for every assignment.
If we could think of something and get a ruling, he'd stick to that
ruling but if he could think of something we didn't, then he'd decide
arbitrarily (usually as in "pick the answer so the maximum number of
people lose marks") what the spec would be and mark accordingly. This,
of course, included any fuzziness in the agreed upon rulings.
A very good practical education in carefully reading what you have
been given and thinking about all the possible difficulties. And of
course in dealing with a deliberately obtuse and difficult customer.
One of the best tutorial experiences I had in 10 years and 3 universities.
Zebee
T
Theo Bekkers
Guest
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> If it's the anniversary of Fortran than I suppose it is time for the
> bi-annual prediction of the death of COBOL.
I don't suppose anyone even knows about NEAT. National Electronic Autocoding
Technique.
Theo
> If it's the anniversary of Fortran than I suppose it is time for the
> bi-annual prediction of the death of COBOL.
I don't suppose anyone even knows about NEAT. National Electronic Autocoding
Technique.
Theo
B
Blue Heeler
Guest
Theo Bekkers wrote:
>
> I don't suppose anyone even knows about NEAT. National Electronic
> Autocoding Technique.
>
> Theo
ARRRGH!
It's been 30 years since i worked for NCR and had to learn that ****!
Or at least their bastardised version of it - NEAT-3
--
>
> I don't suppose anyone even knows about NEAT. National Electronic
> Autocoding Technique.
>
> Theo
ARRRGH!
It's been 30 years since i worked for NCR and had to learn that ****!
Or at least their bastardised version of it - NEAT-3
--
Similar threads
