TUHS

tuhs@tuhs.org

5 participants
6532 discussions

Re: [TUHS] Tandem NSK implementation language (was: Happy birthday, John Backus!)

by Paul McJones

> On Dec 4, 2018, Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog(a)lemis.com> wrote: > > The original Tandem OS (called Guardian at the time) was written in Tandem's TAL (Transaction Application Language, amongst other productions), a vague evolution of HP's SPL that looked more like Algol, starting in about 1974. That is also the earliest I know of an operating system being implemented entirely in a high level language. Most likely the earliest operating system written in a high-level language was the one for the Burroughs B5000 (early 1960s), written in a dialect of Algol 60. Others: Multics, written in PL/1 (starting in mid 1960s), the operating system for the Berkeley Computer Corporation’s BCC-500, written in BCC SPL (system programming language) (late 1960s), OS6 by Stoy and Strachey, written in BCPL (early 1970s), Xerox Alto OS, written in BCPL (about 1974).

6 years, 6 months

ARPAnet now 4 nodes

by Dave Horsfall

The ARPAnet reached four nodes on this day in 1969 (anyone know their names?); at least one "history" site reckoned the third node was connected in 1977 (and I'm still waiting for a reply to my correction). Well, I can believe that perhaps there were only three left by then... Hmmm... According to my notes, the nodes were UCSB, UCLA, SRI, and Utah. -- Dave

6 years, 7 months

In Memoriam: John Lions

by Dave Horsfall

We lost Dr. John Lions of this day in 1998; he was one of my Comp Sci lecturers (yes, I helped him write The Book, and yes, you'll find my name in the back). -- Dave

6 years, 7 months

Happy birthday, John Backus!

by Dave Horsfall

As every computer programmer should know, John Backus was emitted in 1924; he gave us the BNF syntax (he is the "B"), but he also gave us that FORTRAN obscenity... Yeah, it was a nice language at the time; the engineers loved it, but tthe computer scientists hated it (have you ever tried to debug a FORTRAN program that somebody else wrote?). Trivia: there is no way that FORTRAN can be described in any syntax; it is completely ad-hoc. -- Dave

6 years, 7 months

> there is no way that FORTRAN can be described in any syntax

by Doug McIlroy

I did just that. The National Bureau of Standards picked it up in NBS Handbook 131, "Using ANS FORTRAN" (1980). It is expressed in the same formalism that Burroughs used for Algol. Doug

6 years, 7 months

The (un)importance of roff

by Doug McIlroy

Thhis is a cross-posting from the groff mailing list, where it was speculated that without roff there might be no Unix. Old hands will be familiar with the story. > Without roff, Unix might well have disappeared. The patent department and the AT&T president's office are the only in-house examples I know where Unix was adopted because of *roff. The important adoptions, which led Berk Tague to found a separate Unix Support Group, were mainstream telephone applications and PWB, a Unix-based IDE. The first telephone application happened in the field. An engineer in Charlotte, NC, heard of this cheap easily programmed system and proposed to use it to automate the scheduling and dispatch of maintenance on the floor of a wire center. Ken visited to help get them started. The first Bell Labs telephone application was automating the analysis of central-office trouble reports. These had been voluminous stacks of punched cards that reported every anomaly detected in huge electromechanical switches. The Unix application captured the data on line and identfied systematic failures in real time. The patent adoption was a direct result of Joe Ossanna's salesmaship. Other early adopters were self-motivated, but the generous support lent by Ken, Joe, and others was certainly a tipping force that helped turn isolated events into a self-sustaining movement. Doug

6 years, 7 months

man-page style

by Doug McIlroy

Regardless of standards considerations, if there's any advice that needs to be hammered into man authors, it's to be concise and accurate, but not pedantic. As Will Strunk commanded, "Omit needless words." The most needless words of all are promotional. No man page should utter words like "powerful", "extraordinarily versatile", "user-friendly", or "has a wide range of options". As another instance of the rule, it would be better to recommend short subtitles than to help make them long by recommending quotes. If anything is said about limited-length macros, it would best be under BUGS. As editor for v7-v10, I would not offer v7 as a canonical model. It owed its use of boldface in SYNOPIS to the limited number of fonts (Typically R,F,I,S) that could be on our typesetter at the same time. For v9 we were able to follow Kernighan and adopt a distinct literals font (L, which happened to be Courier but could have been identified with bold had we wished). I still think this is the best choice. As for options, v7 is a very poor model. It has many pages that describe options in line, just as v1 had done for its few options (called flags pre-v7). By v10 all options were displayed in a list format. For nagging reasons of verbal continuity, the options displays were prefaced by *needless words* like, "The following options are recognized". A simple OPTIONS heading would be better. Unfortunately, an OPTIONS heading would intrude between the basic description and less important details that follow the options. (I don't agree that it would come too closely after DESCRIPTION; a majority of man pages already have even shorter sections.) OPTIONS could be moved to the end of DESCRIPTION. However, options may well be the biggest reason for quick peeks at man pages; they should be easy to spot. It has reasonably been suggested that OPTIONS should be a .SS subsection. That might be followed by .SS DETAILS. Doug

6 years, 7 months

Re: [TUHS] man-page style

by norman＠oclsc.org

Grant: Sorry, I mistook the context to be that you wrote something to write the cf file / language for you. === Yep, evidently I didn't write clearly enough. Sorry about that. (Which links us nicely back to the Subject: line, and the concise clarity of the original manual-entry style!) Norman Wilson Toronto ON

6 years, 7 months

Re: [TUHS] man-page style

by Norman Wilson

WIlliam Cheswick <ches(a)cheswick.com> wrote: > As for the configuration: when Norman Wilson moved to Toronto, he > implemented some form of little language for configuring sendmail, > treating it somewhat as an assembly language. Bill's half right. I didn't invent a language; I used what was there. I decided that the best way to deal with Sendmail's own configuration language was to treat it as I would the assembly language for a specialized, irregularly-designed microprocessor: 1. Understand as well as possible what the instructions actually do; 2. Write the simplest possible program that will get the job done; 3. Avoid extra layers of macros and so on that hide the details, because that also hides the irregularities and makes it harder to understand and debug; 4. By the same reason, don't just copy someone else's program that does something complicated; write your own and do things simply. Sendmail has plenty of design flaws (not just in the language), as I'm sure Eric will acknowledge; but I think the biggest problem people have had with it that most people copied the rather-complicated sample configuration files shipped with the source rather than just reading the manual, doing a few experiments to understand the behaviour, and writing something simple. On the other hand, I've never quite understood why so many people treat device drivers as scary and untouchable, copying an existing one and hacking it until it seems to work rather than understanding what the device actually does and writing a simple program to control it. So perhaps my brain just doesn't work normally. Norman Wilson Toronto ON

6 years, 7 months

Re: [TUHS] [OT] azel - was Re: In Memoriam: J.F.Ossanna

by Toby Thain

On 2018-11-29 1:04 PM, Ken Thompson wrote: > its name became astro and it is on the old backup tapes. > written in c. it has old elements for everything. published Thanks. Was it rewritten? Your story has it dating at least back to 1966, which made me think it might not have been C. --Toby > elements are now in a different form and a different time > base, so it needs updating to bring it into the 21st century. > if all you want is the earth, moon, and sun, then it might > be ok. the earth rotation fudge (delta-t) might need to be > re-estimated to get second accuracy. > > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:54 AM, Toby Thain <toby(a)telegraphics.com.au> wrote: >> On 2018-11-27 11:48 PM, Ken Thompson via TUHS wrote: >>> ... >>> a version of azel was maintained all the time >>> i was at bell labs. >> >> As soon as I read this it's been on my mind to ask: Does this program >> survive? Presumably it was Fortran? What did it run on? >> >> --Toby >> >

6 years, 7 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