TUHS

tuhs@tuhs.org

34 participants
6476 discussions

by Bryan St. Amour

Hello! I have just joined this mailing list recently, and figured I would give an introduction to myself. My first encounter with Unix took place in 2006 when I started my undergraduate studies in Computer Science. The main servers all ran Solaris, and we accessed them via thin clients. Eventually I wanted a similar feeling operating system for my personal computer, so that I could do my assignments without having to always log into the school servers, and so I came across Linux. I hopped around for a while, but eventually settled with Slackware for my personal computers. Nowadays I run a mixture of Linux and BSD operating systems for various purposes. Unfortunately my day job has me writing desktop software for Windows (no fun there :(), so I'm thankful to have found a group of people with similar computing interests as myself, and I look forward to chatting with you all! Regards, Bryan St. Amour

3 years, 4 months

Re: [TUHS] [COFF] Book Recommendation

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

OK, this is my last _civil_ request to stop email-bombing both lists with trafic. In the future, I will say publicly _exactly_ what I think - and if screens still had phosphor, it would probably peel it off. I can see that there are cases when one might validly want to post to both lists - e.g. when starting a new discusson. However, one of the two should _always_ be BCC'd, so that simple use of reply won't generate a copy to both. I would suggest that one might say something like 'this discussion is probably best continued on the <foo> list' - which could be seeded by BCCing the _other_. Thank you. Noel

3 years, 4 months

Re: [TUHS] Book Recommendation

by Douglas McIlroy

http://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/jeremy.gibbons/publications/fission.pdf Duncan Mak wrote > Haskell's powerful higher-level functions > make middling fragments of code very clear, but can compress large > code to opacity. Jeremy Gibbons, a high priest of functional > programming, even wrote a paper about deconstructing such wonders for > improved readability. > I went looking for this paper by Jeremy Gibbons here: https://dblp.org/pid/53/1090.html but didn't find anything resembling it. What's the name of the paper?

3 years, 4 months

UNIX/AT&T patent licensing

by Warren Toomey

All, I got this e-mail forwarded on from John Fox via Eric S. Raymond. Cheers, Warren Hi Eric, I think you might find this interesting. I have a 2001 copy of your book. I dog-eared page 9 twenty years ago because of this section: It spread very rapidly with AT&T, in spite of the lack of any formal support program for it. By 1980 it had spread to a large number of university and research computing sites, and thousands of hackers considered it home. Regarding the "spread", I believe one of the contributing factors was AT&T's decision to give the source code away to universities. And in doing so, unwittingly provided the fertile soil for open source development. I happen to know the man who made that decision. He was my father-in-law. He died Tuesday. He had no idea what UNIX was, and had no idea what his decision helped to create. Funny when things we do have such a major impact without us even knowing. That was certainly true in this case. Anyway, I thought you'd be interested to know. His name is John (Jack) H. Bolt. He was 95. PS, before making the decision, he called Ken Olson at DEC to see if he'd be interested in buying it, lock, stock, and barrel. Jack's opening offer was $250k. Olson wasn't interested. And on that, Jack's decision was made. John Fox

3 years, 4 months

Re: [TUHS] Book Recommendation

by Douglas McIlroy

>> The former notation C(B(A)) became A->B->C. This was PL/I's gift to C. > You seem to have a gift for notation. That's rare. Curious what you think of APL? I take credit as a go-between, not as an inventor. Ken Knowlton introduced the notation ABC in BEFLIX, a pixel-based animation language. Ken didn't need an operator because identifiers were single letters. I showed Ken's scheme to Bud Lawson, the originator of PL/I's pointer facility. Bud liked it and came up with the vivid -> notation to accommodate longer identifiers. If I had a real gift of notation I would have come up with the pipe symbol. In my original notation ls|wc was written ls>wc>. Ken Thompson invented | a couple of months later. That was so influential that recently, in a paper that had nothing to do with Unix, I saw | referred to as the "pipe character"! APL is a fascinating invention, but can be so compact as to be inscrutable. (I confess not to have practiced APL enough to become fluent.) In the same vein, Haskell's powerful higher-level functions make middling fragments of code very clear, but can compress large code to opacity. Jeremy Gibbons, a high priest of functional programming, even wrote a paper about deconstructing such wonders for improved readability. Human impatience balks at tarrying over a saying that puts so much in a small space. Yet it helps once you learn it. Try reading transcripts of medieval Arabic algebra carried out in words rather than symbols. Iverson's hardware descriptions in APL are another case where symbology pays off. Doug

3 years, 4 months

Ratfor revived!

by Arnold Robbins

Hi All. Mainly for fun (sic), I decided to revive the Ratfor (Rational Fortran) preprocessor. Please see: https://github.com/arnoldrobbins/ratfor I started with the V6 code, then added the V7, V8 and V10 versions on top of it. Each one has its own branch so that you can look at the original code, if you wish. The man page and the paper from the V7 manual are also included. Starting with the Tenth Edition version, I set about to modernize the code and get it to compile and run on a modern-day system. (ANSI style declarations and function headers, modern include files, use of getopt, and most importantly, correct use of Yacc yyval and yylval variables.) You will need Berkely Yacc installed as byacc in order to build it. I have only touch-tested it, but so far it seems OK. 'make' runs in like 2 seconds, really quick. On my Ubuntu Linux systems, it compiles with no warnings. I hope to eventually add a test suite also, if I can steal some time. Before anyone asks, no, I don't think anybody today has any real use for it. This was simply "for fun", and because Ratfor has a soft spot in my heart. "Software Tools" was, for me, the most influential programming book that I ever read. I don't think there's a better book to convey the "zen" of Unix. Thanks, Arnold

3 years, 4 months

Re: [TUHS] Encoding an ISA: Random Logic vs. Control Stores

by Douglas McIlroy

My take on defining random logic random logic : hardware :: spaghetti code : software Doug

3 years, 4 months

Encoding an ISA: Random Logic vs. Control Stores

by pbirkel＠gmail.com

I believe that the PDP-11 ISA was defined at a time when DEC was still using random logic rather than a control store (which came pretty soon thereafter). Given a random logic design it's efficient to organize the ISA encoding to maximize its regularity. Probably also of some benefit to compilers in a memory-constrained environment? I'm not sure at what point in time we can say "lots of processors" had moved to a control store based implementation. Certainly the IBM System/360 was there in the mid-60's. HP was there by the late 60's. -----Original Message----- From: TUHS <tuhs-bounces(a)minnie.tuhs.org> On Behalf Of Larry McVoy Sent: Monday, November 29, 2021 10:18 PM To: Clem Cole <clemc(a)ccc.com> Cc: TUHS main list <tuhs(a)minnie.tuhs.org>; Eugene Miya <eugene(a)soe.ucsc.edu> Subject: Re: [TUHS] A New History of Modern Computing - my thoughts On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 05:12:44PM -0800, Larry McVoy wrote: > I remember Ken Witte (my TA for the PDP-11 class) trying to get me to > see how easy it was to read the octal. If I remember correctly (and I > probably don't, this was ~40 years ago), the instructions were divided > into fields, so instruction, operand, operand and it was all regular, > so you could see that this was some form of an add or whatever, it got > the values from these registers and put it in that register. I've looked it up and it is pretty much as Ken described. The weird thing is that there is no need to do it like the PDP-11 did it, you could use random numbers for each instruction and lots of processors did pretty much that. The PDP-11 didn't, it was very uniform to the point that Ken's ability to read octal made perfect sense. I was never that good but a little google and reading and I can see how he got there. ... --lm

3 years, 4 months

Encoding an ISA: Random Logic vs. Control Stores

by Paul Ruizendaal

For DEC memo’s on designing the PDP-11 see bitsavers: http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/pdp11/memos/ (thank you Bitsavers! I love that archive) Ad van de Goor (author of a few of the memo’s) was my MSc thesis professor. I recall him saying in the early 80’s that in his view the PDP-11 should have been an 18-bit machine; he reasoned that even in the late 60’s it was obvious that 16-bits of address space was not enough for the lifespan of the design. --- For those who want to experiment with FPGA’s and ancient ISA’s, here is my plain Verilog code for the TI 9995 chip, which has an instruction set that is highly reminiscent of the PDP-11: https://gitlab.com/pnru/cortex/-/tree/master The actual CPU code (TMS99095.v) is less than 1000 lines of code. Paul

3 years, 4 months

A New History of Modern Computing - my thoughts

by Jon Steinhart

Eugene Miya visited by last week and accidentally left his copy of the book here so I decided to read it before he came back to pick it up. My overall impression is that while it contained a lot of information, it wasn't presented in a manner that I found interesting. I don't know the intended target audience, but it's not me. A good part of it is that my interest is in the evolution of technology. I think that a more accurate title for the book would be "A New History of the Business of Modern Computing". The book was thorough in covering the number of each type of machine sold and how much money was made, but that's only of passing interest to me. Were it me I would have just summarized all that in a table and used the space to tell some engaging anecdotes. There were a number of things that I felt the book glossed over or missed completely. One is that I didn't think that they gave sufficient credit to the symbiosis between C and the PDP-11 instruction set and the degree to which the PDP-11 was enormously influential. Another is that I felt that the book didn't give computer graphics adequate treatment. I realize that it was primarily in the workstation market segment which was not as large as some of the other segments, but in my opinion the development of the technology was hugely important as it eventually became commodified and highly profitable. Probably due to my personal involvement I felt that the book missed some important steps along the path toward open source. In particular, it used the IPO of Red Hat as the seminal moment while not even mentioning the role of Cygnus. My opinion is that Cygnus was a huge icebreaker in the adoption of open source by the business world, and that the Red Hat IPO was just the culmination. I also didn't feel that there was any message or takeaways for readers. I didn't get any "based on all this I should go and do that" sort of feeling. If the purpose of the book was to present a dry history then it pretty much did it's job. Obviously the authors had to pick and choose what to write about and I would have made some different choices. But, not my book. Jon

3 years, 4 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

TUHS