27 Feb
2002
27 Feb
'02
3:47 p.m.
> Peart came in, and while they were impressed with
his
> drumming abilities, they were also thinking, "Hey! This guy can READ!"
Reminds me of the guy who went to an audition and was asked by the band
leader if he could read music.
He replied, "Not enough to screw up my playing."
Also reminds me of "programmers" who can "write code" but seem unable
to
read other people's code. Has anyone else had this experience? I run into
this sort of person all the time . . .
Glen
0/0
27 Feb
27 Feb
4:42 p.m.
It was thus said that the Great Glen Goodwin once stated:
Also reminds me of "programmers" who can "write code" but seem unable
to
read other people's code. Has anyone else had this experience? I run into
this sort of person all the time . . .
I'm one of those programmers. I have a real hard time following (the
often convoluted) code of other programmers. Given enough time and an
understanding of the syntax of the language (for instance, Perl *still*
looks like line noise to me) I can fathom what a piece of code is attempting
to do.
I also find it easier to follow assembly code; the higher the code the
harder I find it is to follow for some reason.
-spc (My own code is of course, crystal clear 8-)
9:19 p.m.
New subject: Reply to: RE: Rush! ( was: RE: Once in a Lifetime, Twice in Forever)
At 12:47 AM 28/02/2002 -0500, Glen Goodwin wrote:
Also reminds me of "programmers" who can
"write code" but seem unable to
read other people's code. Has anyone else had this experience? I run into
this sort of person all the time . . .
I quite often have problems reading other peoples code. This is typically
due to either
1) A total mess of spaghetti that requires you to have the same twisted
brain as the original author.
or
2) Frustrations as I read the code, thinking all the time "this isn't the
way to do this", "why the **** did you do this", etc, etc.
Well written code isn't usually a problem, although I'll admit that I
reviewed some code I wrote 20+ years ago just recently and couldn't make
much sense of it at all (tricky PDP-10 assembler). The structure was good,
I just couldn't understand the code!
Huw Davies | e-mail: Huw.Davies(a)kerberos.davies.net.au
| "If God had wanted soccer played in the
| air, the sky would be painted green"
28 Feb
28 Feb
12:01 a.m.
New subject: Reply to: RE: Rush! ( was: RE: Once in a Lifetime, Twice in Forever)
At 10:19 PM 2/28/02 +1100, you wrote:
At 12:47 AM 28/02/2002 -0500, Glen Goodwin wrote:
-snip-
Also reminds me of "programmers" who can
"write code" but seem unable to
read other people's code. Has anyone else had this experience? I run into
this sort of person all the time . . .
I quite often have problems reading other peoples code. This is typically
due to either or
2) Frustrations as I read the code, thinking all the time "this isn't the
way to do this", "why the **** did you do this", etc, etc.
Huw Davies | e-mail: Huw.Davies(a)kerberos.davies.net.au
I can symphatize with this. Being a prof, I get to read many
homework assignments. But I learned many years ago that to do justice
to the students you have to stay open, forget about your own
methods (and yes, I feel rather strongly on the subject of "appropriate
methods") and make a honest effort to find out what they were trying
to do. Sometimes, they actually exhibit very creative thinking.
carlos.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Carlos E. Murillo-Sanchez carlos_murillo(a)nospammers.ieee.org
2:04 a.m.
New subject: Write only programming
Also reminds me of "programmers" who can
"write code" but
seem unable to read other people's code. Has anyone else
had this experience? I run into this sort of person all the time . . .
Youu could probably make a graph of "Write Only" languages,
those that allow you to get things done, but then don't explain
themselves very well when read later.
The graph would have CoBOL and Pascal on the left side,
and c and APL on the right.
I can probably read anything, but I realize its an imposition asking
a newcomer to read something that was poorly written, something
where maintence considerations were just forgotten or ignored.
John A.
2:24 a.m.
New subject: Write only programming
Rumor has it that John Allain may have mentioned these words:
I'd have to disagree - I'd think C is somewhere in the middle (well, maybe
middle right) but more to the right would be 68xx/65xx assembly, then x86 &
Lisp, but I'll agree that APL is the "king daddy" of unreadable
languages... that's why I love it so much! ;-)
Laterz,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger --- sysadmin, Iceberg Computers
Recycling is good, right??? Ok, so I'll recycle an old .sig.
If at first you don't succeed, nuclear warhead
disarmament should *not* be your first career choice.
Also reminds
me of "programmers" who can "write code" but
seem unable to read other people's code. Has anyone else
had this experience? I run into this sort of person all the time . . .
Youu could
probably make a graph of "Write Only" languages,
those that allow you to get things done, but then don't explain
themselves very well when read later.
The graph would have CoBOL and Pascal on the left side,
and c and APL on the right. 
12:30 p.m.
New subject: Write only programming
> Youu could probably make a graph of "Write
Only" languages,
> those that allow you to get things done, but then don't explain
> themselves very well when read later.
> The graph would have CoBOL and Pascal on the left side,
> and c and APL on the right.
I'd have to disagree - I'd think C is
somewhere in the middle (well, maybe
middle right) but more to the right would be 68xx/65xx assembly, then x86 &
Lisp, but I'll agree that APL is the "king daddy" of unreadable
languages... that's why I love it so much! ;-)
Trump card of "far right" languages: INTERCAL. I guess that would make
these languages fascist or something, being so far on the right?
--
----------------------------- personal page: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
Cameron Kaiser, Point Loma Nazarene University * ckaiser(a)stockholm.ptloma.edu
-- Good-bye. I am leaving because I am bored. -- George Saunders' dying words -
12:58 p.m.
New subject: Write only programming
Cameron Kaiser wrote:
Trump card of "far right" languages:
INTERCAL. I guess that would make
these languages fascist or something, being so far on the right?
How dare you call a programing languge that has the 'Come from'
statement
far right! get your compiler and start writing real code
http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/intercal/
--
Ben Franchuk - Dawn * 12/24 bit cpu *
www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/index.html
1:02 p.m.
New subject: Write only programming
This is a personal tirade of mine. There is no such thing as a language
that supports comments that can be considered write-only. There are
write-only programmers, but personally, I can't think of a single language
that doesn't support comments in one form or another. From using Forth with
shadow files to the latest and greatest 5GL languages, they all support
comments. Feel free to show an example of a language that doesn't support
comments, it will be new to me.
I've used ALGOL, FORTRAN, COBOL, Forth, C/C++, Java, Pascal, LOGO,
Smalltalk, Perl, Python, Ruby, DBASE, BASIC, PL/1, PL/M, ADA, Modula, APL,
Foxpro, SQL, and a few others that I can't even recall anymore. I've
written assembler on PICs, 6502, 68xx, 68xxx, 8051, 1802s, 8080/Z80, 29030s,
x86, Cyber 74, MSP430, TI DSPs, ADI DSPs, and about a dozen other
processors. My personal experience says there is NO write-only language.
So don't blame the language. Blame the programmer. As we used to say,
"You can write FORTRAN in any language."
--John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
[mailto:owner-classiccmp@classiccmp.org]On Behalf Of Cameron Kaiser
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 21:31 PM
To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Write only programming
> Youu could probably make a graph of
"Write Only" languages,
> those that allow you to get things done, but then don't explain
> themselves very well when read later.
> The graph would have CoBOL and Pascal on the left side,
> and c and APL on the right.
I'd have to disagree - I'd think C is
somewhere in the middle
(well, maybe
middle right) but more to the right would be
68xx/65xx
assembly, then x86 &
Lisp, but I'll agree that APL is the
"king daddy" of unreadable
languages... that's why I love it so much! ;-)
Trump card of "far right" languages: INTERCAL. I guess that would make
these languages fascist or something, being so far on the right?
--
----------------------------- personal page:
http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
Cameron Kaiser, Point Loma Nazarene University *
ckaiser(a)stockholm.ptloma.edu
-- Good-bye. I am leaving because I am bored. -- George Saunders'
dying words -
2:44 p.m.
New subject: Write only programming
It was thus said that the Great John Chris Wren once stated:
This is a personal tirade of mine. There is no such thing as a language
that supports comments that can be considered write-only. There are
write-only programmers, but personally, I can't think of a single language
that doesn't support comments in one form or another. From using Forth with
shadow files to the latest and greatest 5GL languages, they all support
comments. Feel free to show an example of a language that doesn't support
comments, it will be new to me.
Then you haven't come across Befunge:
http://www.catseye.mb.ca/esoteric/befunge/
Befunge98 *appears* to have a facility for comments, but given the nature
of the language, it could conceivably overwrite its own comments. Befunge93
(the first version) doesn't support comments at all.
I've used ALGOL, FORTRAN, COBOL, Forth, C/C++,
Java, Pascal, LOGO,
Smalltalk, Perl, Python, Ruby, DBASE, BASIC, PL/1, PL/M, ADA, Modula, APL,
Foxpro, SQL, and a few others that I can't even recall anymore. I've
written assembler on PICs, 6502, 68xx, 68xxx, 8051, 1802s, 8080/Z80, 29030s,
x86, Cyber 74, MSP430, TI DSPs, ADI DSPs, and about a dozen other
processors. My personal experience says there is NO write-only language.
Then you haven't seen BrainFuck:
http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/bf/
And yes, you *can* get a compiler for BrainFuck. Why you would, is
another question.
These are *almost* on topic here (both being around nine years old).
-spc (And you thought INTERCAL was bad ... )
1 Mar
1 Mar
10:11 a.m.
New subject: Write only programming
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 1238 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20020302/dc34f413/at…
11:21 a.m.
New subject: Write only programming
I try not to do that anymore. And I generally didn't code straight out my
head on to the IMSAI or PPU switches. I'd usually write it on paper. I did
get to where I knew most of the major 8080 opcodes off the top of my head,
and many of the PPU opcodes, but except for the rote memorization of the
loader programs (which I don't consider programming, per se. I think of
programming as the art/science of designing an algorith/process to do
something), I didn't enter stuff off the top of my head. Or at least, very
few exceptions. Same for calculators.
As to whoever brough up BrainFuck and Befunge, that's not a real
programming language for real applications. That's what I call a synthetic
language, whose sole purpose was to write a language to accomplish those
goals. Granted, you can program in them, and granted they don't have
comments, but they're not what I consider "real" or "serious"
programming
languages.
And if anyone writes code for my company that doesn't document/comment it,
no programming genius is worth the trouble. S/he gets hit by a truck, I'm
out of business. I'll take 3 "ordinairy" programmers over one
self-centered
egotistical non-comment-writing "super-star" anyday. The super-stars
aren't
worth their trouble, long term.
[snip]
If you write machine code rather than assembly
language (I've done this a
few time...) then again there's no way to include comments...
-tony
28 Feb
28 Feb
1:26 p.m.
New subject: Write only programming
Trump card of "far right" languages:
INTERCAL. I guess that would
make these languages fascist or something, being so far on the right?
Man, this is getting strange. I just read some programs in a place
called bf-source, if you catch the drift, and popped a few alveoli
(IE,ROTFL) doing so.
Wish I got as many responses on my SDI vs DSSI thread.
John A.
11:44 p.m.
New subject: Write only programming
Sometimes I wish I were able to programme, and wonder about something
like Brainfuck. then I sober up.
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, John Allain wrote:
M. K. Peirce
Rhode Island Computer Museum, Inc.
Shady Lea, Rhode Island
"Casta est quam nemo rogavit."
- Ovid
Trump card of
"far right" languages: INTERCAL. I guess that would
make these languages fascist or something, being so far on the right?
Man, this is getting strange. I just read some programs in a place
called bf-source, if you catch the drift, and popped a few alveoli
(IE,ROTFL) doing so.
Wish I got as many responses on my SDI vs DSSI thread.
John A.
8:49 a.m.
New subject: Write only programming
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Allain" <allain(a)panix.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 2:34 AM
Subject: Write only programming
And JCL would be where? I class that as the ultimate 'write only'
language.
Also reminds
me of "programmers" who can "write code" but
seem unable to read other people's code. Has anyone else
had this experience? I run into this sort of person all the time . . .
Youu could probably make a graph of "Write Only" languages,
those that allow you to get things done, but then don't explain
themselves very well when read later.
The graph would have CoBOL and Pascal on the left side,
and c and APL on the right. I can probably read anything,
:^) Ah! You've never seen JCL have you?
but I realize its an imposition asking
a newcomer to read something that was poorly written, something
where maintence considerations were just forgotten or ignored.
Some programmers do this deliberately. It used to be considered 'job
security'. ;^)
Cheers
Geoff in Oz
9:23 a.m.
New subject: Write only programming
Rumor has it that Geoff Roberts may have mentioned these words:
Have *you* seen APL? JCL was/is a cakewalk compared to APL... and IMHO,
it's more readable than Lisp... but RPN was never my bag, anyway.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Allain" <allain(a)panix.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 2:34 AM
Subject: Write only programming
And JCL would be where? I class that as the ultimate 'write only'
language.
JCL would be in the basement of my new house... I saved all of my JCL
listings when I worked at EDS (Generous Motors... ;-) back in '89-90, so
this is amazingly on-topic... ;^>
Also
reminds me of "programmers" who can "write code" but
seem unable to read other people's code. Has anyone else
had this experience? I run into this sort of person all the time . . .
Youu could probably make a graph of "Write Only" languages,
those that allow you to get things done, but then don't explain
themselves very well when read later.
The graph would have CoBOL and Pascal on the left side,
and c and APL on the right. I can probably
read anything,
:^) Ah! You've never seen JCL have you? Some programmers do this deliberately. It used to be
considered 'job
security'. ;^)
I used to think that way, until I had to fix some of my own "unreadable"
code to save *my own* job... afterwards I considered it "job SUCKurity".
I'm not the best with commenting nowadays, but I'm one helluva lot better
than before! :-P
Laterz,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger --- sysadmin, Iceberg Computers
Recycling is good, right??? Ok, so I'll recycle an old .sig.
If at first you don't succeed, nuclear warhead
disarmament should *not* be your first career choice.
12:23 p.m.
New subject: Write only programming
On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Geoff Roberts wrote:
And JCL would be where? I class that as the ultimate 'write only'
language.
Ahh, JCL. *sigh* There's some memories.
Peace... Sridhar
Also reminds me of "programmers" who can
"write code" but
seem unable to read other people's code. Has anyone else
had this experience? I run into this sort of person all the time . . .
Youu could probably make a graph of "Write Only" languages,
those that allow you to get things done, but then don't explain
themselves very well when read later.
The graph would have CoBOL and Pascal on the left side,
and c and APL on the right. 
12:43 p.m.
New subject: Write only programming
And JCL would
be where? I class that as the ultimate 'write only'
language.
Ahh, JCL. *sigh* There's some memories.
1:11 p.m.
New subject: Write only programming
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Eric Dittman wrote:
I haven't used JCL for several years, but I never had a
problem with it.
There's nothing *wrong* with it per se. It's just a little arcane.
Peace... Sridhar
And JCL would be where? I class that as the ultimate
'write only'
language.
Ahh, JCL. *sigh* There's some memories.
1:39 p.m.
New subject: Write only programming
And JCL would
be where? I class that as the ultimate 'write only'
language.
Ahh, JCL. *sigh* There's some memories. 
2:19 p.m.
New subject: Write only programming
On Thursday 28 February 2002 21:23, Julius Sridhar wrote:
On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Geoff Roberts wrote:
And JCL would be where? I class that as the ultimate 'write only'
language.
Ahh, JCL. *sigh* There's some memories.
I spend my days fixing JCL and wishing I could find someone wanting me to
write APL. I find perl to be unreadable, and I still haven't gotten very
far with lisp.
Also reminds me of "programmers" who can
"write code" but
seem unable to read other people's code. Has anyone else
had this experience? I run into this sort of person all the time
. . .
Youu could probably make a graph of "Write Only" languages,
those that allow you to get things done, but then don't explain
themselves very well when read later.
The graph would have CoBOL and Pascal on the left side,
and c and APL on the right. 
12:50 p.m.
New subject: Write only programming
Quothe Geoff Roberts, from writings of Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 09:19:18AM +1030:
Some programmers do this deliberately. It used to be
considered 'job
security'. ;^)
Also, remember that obfuscated code is an art form that should bring
bonuses and raises to programmers skilled in this art. Besides, a
programmer who can't read so-called "difficult to read code," with no
comments, isn't a real programmer. :-)
--
Copyright (C) 2001 R. D. Davis The difference between humans & other animals:
All Rights Reserved an unnatural belief that we're above Nature &
rdd(a)rddavis.org 410-744-4900 her other creatures, using dogma to justify such
http://www.rddavis.org beliefs and to justify much human cruelty.
1:30 p.m.
New subject: Write only programming
At 09:19 AM 3/1/02 +1030, you wrote:
Argh. GO SYSIN DD.......
--------------------------------------------------------------
Carlos E. Murillo-Sanchez carlos_murillo(a)nospammers.ieee.org
I can probably
read anything,
:^) Ah! You've never seen JCL have you? 
2:43 p.m.
New subject: JCL (was: Write only programming
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Carlos Murillo wrote:
Believe it or not, I once seriously considered changing the spelling of my
name to SYSIN, so that at least the people in the industry would pronounce
it correctly.
--
Fred Cisin cisin(a)xenosoft.com
:^) Ah!
You've never seen JCL have you?
Argh. GO SYSIN DD.......
4:50 p.m.
New subject: JCL (was: Write only programming
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) wrote:
Believe it or not, I once seriously considered changing the spelling of my
name to SYSIN, so that at least the people in the industry would pronounce
it correctly.
How do people usually pronounce it?
Peace... Sridhar
:^) Ah! You've never seen JCL have you?
Argh. GO SYSIN DD....... 
5:18 p.m.
New subject: JCL (was: Write only programming
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) wrote:
Believe it or not, I once seriously considered changing the spelling of my
name to SYSIN, so that at least the people in the industry would pronounce
it correctly.
How do people usually pronounce it?
Peace... Sridhar
I don't think SYSIN helps -- I immediately thought of SYSOP.
:^) Ah! You've never seen JCL have you?
Argh. GO SYSIN DD.......
1 Mar
1 Mar
4:29 a.m.
New subject: JCL (was: Write only programming
On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Julius Sridhar wrote:
Believe it or
not, I once seriously considered changing the spelling of my
name to SYSIN, so that at least the people in the industry would pronounce
it correctly. How do people usually pronounce it?
Mostly they just panic over an unfamiliar word, and try a hard 'C', a long
'i', etc. But hardly anybody has trouble guessing ways to pronounce
"SYSIN".
Most of the "Cisin"s in the U.S. changed their spelling to "Sisson".
(which throws away years of heritage going all the way back to Ellis
Island).
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
:^) Ah!
You've never seen JCL have you?
Argh. GO SYSIN DD....... 
28 Feb
28 Feb
5:54 p.m.
New subject: JCL (was: Write only programming
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Carlos Murillo wrote:
Believe it or not, I once seriously considered changing the spelling of my
name to SYSIN, so that at least the people in the industry would pronounce
it correctly.
The system administrators at my last company almost deleted my Netware
login because they didn't know what the SISMAIL account was used for (and
who misspelled it :)
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
:^) Ah!
You've never seen JCL have you?
Argh. GO SYSIN DD.......
8332
days inactive
8334
days old
27 comments
19 participants
participants (19)
-
acme_ent＠bellsouth.net -
allain＠panix.com -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
at258＠osfn.org -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
cmurillo＠emtelsa.multi.net.co -
dittman＠dittman.net -
foo＠siconic.com -
geoffrob＠stmarks.pp.catholic.edu.au -
Huw.Davies＠kerberos.davies.net.au -
jcwren＠jcwren.com -
kenziem＠sympatico.ca -
rdd＠rddavis.org -
spc＠conman.org -
spectre＠stockholm.ptloma.edu -
vance＠ikickass.org -
wmsmith＠earthlink.net -
zmerch＠30below.com