12 Feb
2010
12 Feb
'10
10:44 a.m.
Russ Bartlett ????????:
In the early days when we wrote programs they were written onto
coding forms. Once punched onto 80 column cards we would check
each card to ensure that had been key punched correctly. Checking
an 8000 statement program took time. Once checked we would have
it listed (used little machine time). We would then dry run
through the program looking for logic errors. Having done that we
would have it compiled. Typically there would be a couple of
development slots or so a week for testing so we had ensure that we
had done due diligence. If it compiled we would schedule a test
slot and run against test data. Debugging consisted of analyzing
dumps and correcting the code. Contrast this against interactive
source debuggers. Today machine time is inexpensive and many
compiles and test shots may be performed in a day. "Workbench"
tools allow the programmer to run their program without even
hitting the mainframe. A totally different world.
I still have a pad or two of IBM coding forms and print formatting
forms. And an IBM flowchart template. And slide rules. And trig
tables. And those stinky Bishop Graphics PCB templates that still
stink after 35 years.
Although I coded in my head and thought flowcharts a waste of time
when I could clearly see the program flow, I still kept the forms and
template. Somehow I didn't keep the boxes full of listings and punched
tape.
I would argue the public aspect of the issue was a scam. The people
who needed to know, knew already. The public hype around the issue
was overblown and unnecessary.
And it turns out that y2k+10 is a problem, sometimes very critical,
which gets no attention and certainly no hype. It caught everyone
unawares.
Remember the various experts and consultants railing about how
microwave ovens and cars and anything with a microprocessor in it
(things that didn't even know about the date) were going to fail?
I was told my 1976 Litronix LED watch was going to quit working on
2000 Jan 1. It stopped working in 2003. I forgot to replace the battery.
Reminds me that a friend's 99 Buick wouldn't start on New Year's 2001.
She said it was Y2K. It was a dead battery cos the lights were left
on. She countered that the lights were infected with the Y2K bug.
I still have the bulletin from the government mailed out to every
household in Canada to prepare everyone for Y2K: a fine example of
public folly.
I have one of those but it came from the California Office of
Emergency Services, over the Governor's signature. Understated.
Scarily understated.
There's still nothing about y2k+10.
==
jd