I've been meaning to ask about this for a while....
"... The reason why is because there was tremendous antagonism between New
York and L.A. L.A. was, you know, full of color, full of acid, full of
hippies, and we were not like that.
We dressed in black and white. We did not like free love. ..... We took
amphetamine; they took LSD. They were, you know, sort of loving and happy,
and we were - we weren't really evil, we were more intellectual, more about
art."
[Mary Woronov, in an interview with NPR's Terry Gross on "Fresh Air",
talking about New York City, Warhol's Factory and shows in Los Angeles
while touring with the Velvet Underground:
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=241437872]
Note: I am not suggesting that anyone involved with Unix ever took
amphetamines, nor, despite the usual crack about LSD and BSD, that anyone
on the west coast was taking acid, though Markov's "What the Dormouse Said"
would indicate that many of you WERE tripping.
It seems like Unix is largely a child of the coasts. Notable work in Utah,
Colorado and Chicago aside, it seems the bulk of early Unix work happened
in either the greater New York metro area in northern New Jersey or the
greater Bay area around San Francisco. Notable work was also done in
Massachusetts, but again, that's a coastal state and I think it's fair to
say that most of that was inside the route 128 corridor. Of course work was
done internationally, but I'm particularly curious about differences in US
culture here, and how they influenced things.
The question is, to what extent did differences in coastal cultures
influence things like design aesthetics? I think it's is accurate to
characterize early BTL Unix by it's minimalism, and others have echoed this
(cf. Richard Gabriel in the "Worse is Better" papers). But similarly, BSD
has always felt like a larger system -- didn't Lions go as far as to quip
about the succinctness of 6th Edition being "fixed" by 4BSD?
Anyway, I believe it is fair to say that early Unix has a rather distinct
feel from later BSD-derived systems and the two did evolve in different
geographic locations. Furthermore, the world was not as connected then as
it is now.
So to what extent, if any, was this a function of the larger cultural
forces at play near where that work was taking place?
- Dan C.
> If I can be so bold as to offer an interpretation: Doug's approximations
> treat ellipses as mathematical objects and algorithmically determine what
> pixels are closest to points on the infinitesimally-thin curves, while
> Knuth's (or one his students') method acknowledges that the curve has a
> width defined by the nib
Just so.
> I find it impossible that neither Knuth nor Hobby were unaware of McIlroy's
> work and vice-versa; of course he would have known about and examined troff
> just as the Bell Labs folks knew about TeX.
We were generally aware of each other's work. My papers on drawing
lines, circles, and ellipses on rasters, though, were barely connected
to troff. Troff did not contain any drawing algorithms. That work was
relegated to the rendering programs that interpreted ditroff output.
Thus publication-quality rendering with support for thick lines was
outsourced to Adobe and Mergenthaler.
Various PostScript or ditroff postprocessors for screen-based
terminals were written in house. These programs paid little or no
attention to fonts and line widths. But the blit renderers made a
tenuous connection between my ellipse algorithm and troff, since my
work on the topic was stimulated by Rob's need for an ellipse
generator.
Doug
> From: Bakul Shah
> My guess is *not* storing a path instead of a ptr to the inode was done
> to save on memory.
More probably speed; those old disks were not fast, and on a PDP-11, disk
caches were so small that converting the path to the current directory to its
in memory inode could take a bunch of disk reads.
> Every inode has a linkcount so detecting when the last conn. is severed
> not a problem.
Depends; if a directory _has_ to be empty before it can be deleted, maybe; but
if not, no. (Consider if /a/b/c/d exists, and /a/b is removed; the tree
underneath it has to be walked and the components deleted. That could take a
while...) In the general case (e.g. without the restriction to a tree), it's
basically the same problem as garbage collection in LISP.
Noel
> From: Dan Cross
> a port of the _CTSS_ BCPL ROFF sources purportedly written by Doug. I
> wonder if that was actually a thing, or an error?
> ...
> Fortunately, the source [of the original CTSS runoff] is online:
> ...
> Indeed; one finds the following in at least one of the Multics RUNOFF
> source files:
It sounds like all the steps in the chain have pretty definitive evidence -
_except_ whether there was ever a CTSS RUNOFF in BCPL, from Doug.
Happily, we have someone here who should be able to answer that! :-)
Noel
Been reading the heirloom docs. Remember one thing that I disliked
about troff which maybe Doug can explain. It's the language in the
docs. I never understood "interpolating a register" to have any
relation to the definition of interpolate that I learned in math.
Made it a bit hard to learn initially.
Any memory of why that term was used?
> most, if not all of these things were after I arrived.
That may indicate the youth of the narrator more than a lightening of
the culture. Some practical jokes and counter-culture customs from an
earlier day:
When I joined the Labs, everyone talked about the escapades of Claude
Shannon and Dave Hagelbarger--unicycle, outguessing machines, the
finger-on-the-switch box, etc.
When John Kelly became a department head he refused to have his office
carpeted. That would have kept him from stubbing out cigarettes on the
floor.
Bill Baker may have worn a coat and tie, but he kept a jalopy in his
VP parking space. Another employee had a rusty vehicle with weeds
growing out of the fenders.
As early as 1960 BESYS began appending fortune cookies to every
printout. The counter where printouts were delivered got messed up by
people pawing around to see others' fortunes.
One day the audio monitor on the low bit of the 7090 accumulator
stopped producing white noise (with an occasional screech for an
infinite loop) and intoned in aTexas drawl, "Help, I'm caught in a
loop. Help. I'm caught in a loop. Help ..."
A pixelated nude mural appeared in Ed David's office. (Maybe this no
longer counts as a prank. It is now regarded as a foundational event
in computer art.)
Ed Gilbert had a four-drawer filing cabinet labeled integers,
rationals, reals, and balloon. The latter held the tattered remains of
lunchtime hot-air experiments. He also had a chalkboard globe with a
world map on it. It sometimes took several spins before a visitor
realized that you really shouldn't be able to see all the continents
at once--the map appeared twice around the circumference of the globe.
CS had a Gilbert-and-Sullivan duo, Mike Lesk and Peter Neumann, who
produced original entertainment for department parties.
Doug
> Ken and Dennis were teaching [the Votrax] to swear
"Speak" being a phonetics-based program, I suspect they were exploring
multiple spellings. Out of context, lots of spellings were
indistinguishable. For example,
cheap, cheat, cheek, chief was hard to tell from cheep, cheep, cheep, cheep..
At the risk of repeating myself, the fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck example
came to the fore when a "speak" kiosk was installed at Epcot. PR folks
were worried that people would try it on bad words in this public
setting and asked me to block them. I said I'd block whatever words
they told me to. Duly, I was sent a list--on the letterhead of an AT&T
vice president. (Was that dictated to a secretary?) Later I heard
that girls would often try friends' names, while boys would try bad
words and exclaim that the machine didn't know them. In fact, those
were among the few words the machine *did* know. Fortunately nobody
ever complained that I hadn't blocked misspellings.
Doug
> Later Brian's work was updated after V7 and included some new tools, and became known as Writer's Workbench, which eventually was entered in the 'toolchest.'
WWB wouldn't exist if text had not routinely existed in
machine-readable form, thanks to word-processing. But the impetus for
WWB came from "style", not from troff.
Style was a spinoff of Lorinda Cherry's "parts", which assigned parts
of speech to the words of a document. Style provided a statistical
profile of the text: measures such as average word length: frequency
of passives, adjectives and compound sentences, reading level, etc.
WWB in turn offered writing advice based on such profiles.
Style was stimulated by Bill Vesterman, a professor of English at
Rutgers, who brought the idea to me. I introduced him to Lorinda, who
had it running in a couple of weeks. Then Nina McDonald at USG
conceived and packaged WWB as a distinct product, not just a
collection of entries in man 1.
Wikipedia reports a surmise that WWB sank out of sight because it was
not a standard part of Unix distributions.
Doug
Steffen Nurpmeso writes:
> Note that heirloom doctools (on github) is a SysV-derived *roff
Wow, thanks for mentioning this. I was unaware of it. When I
recently wrote that it would be nice to add TeX's 2D formatting
to troff I didn't realize that it had already been done.
Something new to play with.
Jon
On the subject of documtation of [nt]roff, no one seems to have
mentioned Narain Gehani's two editions of ``Document Formatting and
Typesetting on the UNIX System'' (700+ pages), and a second two-author
volume that covers grap, mv, ms, and troff. There is a table of
contents of the second edition recorded here:
http://www.math.utah.edu/pub/tex/bib/typeset.html#Gehani:1987:DFT
There is an entry in that file for the first edition too
http://www.math.utah.edu/pub/tex/bib/typeset.html#Gehani:1986:DF
The second volume, co-authored with Steven Lally, is covered here:
http://www.math.utah.edu/pub/tex/bib/typeset.html#Gehani:1988:DFT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Nelson H. F. Beebe Tel: +1 801 581 5254 -
- University of Utah FAX: +1 801 581 4148 -
- Department of Mathematics, 110 LCB Internet e-mail: beebe(a)math.utah.edu -
- 155 S 1400 E RM 233 beebe(a)acm.org beebe(a)computer.org -
- Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0090, USA URL: http://www.math.utah.edu/~beebe/ -
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------