11 May
2010
11 May
'10
8:02 a.m.
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Dan Gahlinger <dgahling at hotmail.com> wrote:
yes it has actually, since some of those pages came to light.
it's entirely possible that valtrep was "purpose-built" for the systems it
ran on.
even the dates I can find of 1970 still push it back newer than fortran from the 50s
havent seen direct links from ieee etc on any excess verbage.
there's almost no historical information on it at all, or on the computers it ran it
(at least not much).
the world may never know, I'm ok with that, but Fred will probably raise a fuss...
What I'm not getting is how or why you feel that something that you
dimly remember from the 1970s is in any way an ancestor to something
that was in wide use some twenty years earlier. I don't follow your
reasoning here.
What it sounds like to me is that you saw some kind of programmable
marking software, not a true programming language, on an electronic
optical mark reading system, not an actual computer /per se/, and you
have parlayed this into being the first high-level programming
language. Yes, it's entirely possible it was based on Fortran, but
lots of things were based on Fortran, including BASIC.
And that you stick to this even when lots of people who know a great
deal more about the subject than you tell you that you are incorrect.
I find that very odd and irrational behaviour.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/liamproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884 ? Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AOL/AIM/iChat/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven ? LiveJournal/Twitter: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? ICQ: 73187508