Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Programming > Basic Misc > Re: Language on...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 8 of 10 Topic 1464 of 1492
Post > Topic >>

Re: Language on the GE-225? [Was: Slashdot/Wired article on May 1st

by Derek <derekrss@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > May 8, 2008 at 09:34 PM

On May 8, 3:48=A0am, ppnerkDELETET...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Phred) wrote:
> In article
<5d3988b0-f0ee-475e-9e30-5071a087d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, "R.Nicholson" <rhnlo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >The article says that at 4 a.m. on May 1st, 1964, Kemeny and Kurtz ran
> >their first BASIC program on Dartmouth college's General Electric
> >GE-225 mainframe.
>
> Interesting, before I read this I would have been happy to say the
> language I was briefly introduced to on a GE-225 at UQ was BASIC.
>
> But that was in 1963! =A0So, does anyone out there recall what *was* the
> actual "user language" on that beast in those days? =A0Attempting to
> dredge the dark recesses of 45-year-old memory I find flutterings of
> an answer... but nothing definite.
>
> Clearly, I didn't get sufficiently involved then to actually write a
> program. :) =A0AFAICR the early lectures all involved matrix algebra
> (which I'd never studied as such) and went so far over my head that I
> decided I had better things to do with my time.
>
> I guess they were leading into a discussion of data arrays and such,
> but they way they presented it was incomprehensible to me. =A0Buggered
> if I know why they felt the need to do it that way -- arrays as such
> are perfectly simple concepts. =A0Perhaps lecturers don't get paid if
> they make things too easy. ;-)
>
> >(Thankfully, they continued program language development beyond
> >their Dartmouth Oversimplified Programming Experiment , or this
> >group [c.l.b.m] might have had the much less desirable name:
comp.lang.DO=
PE =A0:)
>

Just a guess, Phred, but it might have been FORTRAN II which is
superficially quite similar to BASIC. FORTRAN II was certainly around
in 1963. When I first learnt FORTRAN IV (in the 1970s) the examples
were still all very "matrixy", perhaps because it was taught to me as
part of a numeric analysis course. One of the things that I liked
about BASIC was that it could do everything that FORTRAN could do plus
it could handle text. Although you could handle text in FORTRAN IV it
wasn't easy. By comparison text-handling was a doddle with BASIC. In
fact at the time the only generally available language which was
better than BASIC was SNOBOL4.

Cheers

Derek
 




 10 Posts in Topic:
Slashdot/Wired article on May 1st in Basic history
"R.Nicholson" &  2008-05-01 10:35:03 
Re: Slashdot/Wired article on May 1st in Basic history
"Auric__" <n  2008-05-01 19:13:18 
Re: Slashdot/Wired article on May 1st in Basic history
winston19842005 <bjjly  2008-05-01 18:25:33 
Re: Slashdot/Wired article on May 1st in Basic history
"Auric__" <n  2008-05-01 23:18:46 
Re: Slashdot/Wired article on May 1st in Basic history
MC PRTK <prtk.uncensor  2008-05-07 22:53:59 
Re: Slashdot/Wired article on May 1st in Basic history
"Tom Lake" <  2008-05-01 18:31:48 
Language on the GE-225? [Was: Slashdot/Wired article on May 1st
ppnerkDELETETHIS@[EMAIL P  2008-05-08 09:48:29 
Re: Language on the GE-225? [Was: Slashdot/Wired article on May
Derek <derekrss@[EMAIL  2008-05-08 21:34:37 
Re: Language on the GE-225? [Was: Slashdot/Wired article on May
ppnerkDELETETHIS@[EMAIL P  2008-05-09 13:57:06 
Re: Language on the GE-225? [Was: Slashdot/Wired article on May
Happy Trails <nomail@[  2008-05-09 22:45:55 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Fri Jul 25 15:01:59 CDT 2008.