FTL's "cat out of the bag"

[Brock]

Big deal.

In my day, we wrote and debugged programs in Apple Basic on a IIe to present full-color drawings to the class on a Macintosh.  I made a Christmas tree with random-colored lines and twinkling lights, green presents with multi-colored ribbons and bows, and I would've had Rudolf and his red nose too, but I ran out of time.

Fear my skilz!

[d_goddard]

In Jr. High school I had a TRS-80 Color Computer. I got the EDTASM cart so I could write in 6809 assembler directly -- fuck that "Basic" crap!

[Brock]

Ha!  My Tandy 1000 ate your TRS 80 for breakfast!

[Dreepa]

Ha .... I made other kids write my programs for me.... just like I do know.

[Kat Kanning]

Well, I've written programs in binary.  Take that!

[Brock]

Thesis:

After 1 million punch cards and 2,000 runs, I can say with 95% confidence that 3 < 2+2 < 5 and that the #4 lightbulb on the Cray output panel has a 100-use MTBF.

[JonM]

Yeah, well in my day we had to write in binary, but we couldn't afford 1s.  We had to pound the 0s flat and all the other kids made fun of us and threw pocket protectors at us.

[d_goddard]

Well, I've written programs in binary.  Take that!

OK, you got me.
I did code directly in hex opcodes for awhile, once I got familiar enough with the assembler instruction set.

[Barterer]

Eques == emacs user.  If not, I'll eat my shoe.  I mean look at him. 

[eques]

Eques == emacs user.  If not, I'll eat my shoe.  I mean look at him. 

Hope you like "sole" food.

Har har har.

emacs?? are you out of your gourd?

Then again, I'm not even true "vi"... I have to settle for "vim."

[Barterer]

Aw shoot <munch munch munch> ack, the "bootstraps!"

I'd run vim too, except I haven't scratched 1% of vi's features yet. Baby steps. 

[Lex]

I would challenge anyone's assertion that they have "written" programs in binary. You had to have at least written some pseudo code on paper in assembler/diagrams to organize your program and then you painstakingly "translated" the pseudo code into binary (much like a compiler translates assembler into binary).

Unless we're talking adding two numbers together or something else as trivial.

[eques]

Aw shoot <munch munch munch> ack, the "bootstraps!"

I'd run vim too, except I haven't scratched 1% of vi's features yet. Baby steps. 

One of the things that I don't like about vi is that you cannot set the 'backspace' parameter, which allows you to delete text not entered in your current 'insert' session if you so choose, among other things.

Maybe it's a 'bastardization' of vi, but vim makes my text editing experience that much more enjoyable.

I think that, for me, I just never got off the ground with emacs.  vi/vim seemed more intuitive from the get-go (well, as intuitive as an arcane *nix text editor can be that isn't 'pico').

[Kat Kanning]

I would challenge anyone's assertion that they have "written" programs in binary. You had to have at least written some pseudo code on paper in assembler/diagrams to organize your program and then you painstakingly "translated" the pseudo code into binary (much like a compiler translates assembler into binary).

Unless we're talking adding two numbers together or something else as trivial.

OK, you got me.  I was just joking. 

[eques]

I think that the appropriate paradigm prior to "I programmed in binary!" is "I programmed in transistors!!!" and then "I programmed in vacuum tubes!!!" and then, "I programmed in Babbage's Difference Engine!!!! HURRR!!!!"