'continue' as used by tower controler

Paul Tomblin wrote:

In a previous article, "Mike Noel" said:
Is this a commonly used phraseology from ATC? I would have thought just

Only if they're old FORTRAN programmers.

The FORTRAN I used didn't have this command. C did/does. IIRC, PL/I did also.

George Patterson
I childproofed my house, but they *still* get in.

In a previous article, "G.R. Patterson III" said:
Paul Tomblin wrote:

In a previous article, "Mike Noel" said:
Is this a commonly used phraseology from ATC? I would have thought just

Only if they're old FORTRAN programmers.

The FORTRAN I used didn't have this command. C did/does. IIRC, PL/I did also.

I have no idea what weird ass version of FORTRAN you used, but every
version of FORTRAN I used, from IBM FORTRAN-G to Fortran-77 to Vax Fortran
to Watfiv-S had it.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
`And when you've been *plonk*ed by Simon C., you've been *plonked*
by someone who knows when, and why, and how.' - Mike Andrews, asr

Both FORTRAN and C have this keyword.
Boy, are we digressing. Is this a computer nerd forum ;-)


"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
In a previous article, "G.R. Patterson III" said:
Paul Tomblin wrote:

In a previous article, "Mike Noel" said:
Is this a commonly used phraseology from ATC? I would have thought
just

Only if they're old FORTRAN programmers.

The FORTRAN I used didn't have this command. C did/does. IIRC, PL/I did
also.

I have no idea what weird ass version of FORTRAN you used, but every
version of FORTRAN I used, from IBM FORTRAN-G to Fortran-77 to Vax Fortran
to Watfiv-S had it.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
`And when you've been *plonk*ed by Simon C., you've been *plonked*
by someone who knows when, and why, and how.' - Mike Andrews, asr

Let us remember the all-versatile NOP. Then we could alter the command by
inserting an instruction during the execution of the code. Great stuff. Used
it often
when writing programs for the computer that would occupy half a room, but
had
only 2K characters for both the program and data. Those were 6 bit
characters, BTW.
Oh, this was the bigger machine. The machine started with 1K characters. And
no,
it was not a wired program, it had a real programming language. 5 characters
per
instruction. 1 character for the operation, 4 for the operand. Address was
by row and column. Used the same logic right on up the line to those fancy
new languages called
Fortran and Cobol.

The Weiss Family wrote in message ...
Both FORTRAN and C have this keyword.
Boy, are we digressing. Is this a computer nerd forum ;-)


"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
In a previous article, "G.R. Patterson III" said:
Paul Tomblin wrote:

In a previous article, "Mike Noel" said:
Is this a commonly used phraseology from ATC? I would have thought
just

Only if they're old FORTRAN programmers.

The FORTRAN I used didn't have this command. C did/does. IIRC, PL/I did
also.

I have no idea what weird ass version of FORTRAN you used, but every
version of FORTRAN I used, from IBM FORTRAN-G to Fortran-77 to Vax
Fortran
to Watfiv-S had it.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
`And when you've been *plonk*ed by Simon C., you've been *plonked*
by someone who knows when, and why, and how.' - Mike Andrews, asr

"The Weiss Family" wrote in message
...
Both FORTRAN and C have this keyword.
Boy, are we digressing. Is this a computer nerd forum ;-)

printf("Yes", %s);




"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
In a previous article, "G.R. Patterson III" said:
Paul Tomblin wrote:

In a previous article, "Mike Noel" said:
Is this a commonly used phraseology from ATC? I would have thought
just

Only if they're old FORTRAN programmers.

The FORTRAN I used didn't have this command. C did/does. IIRC, PL/I did
also.

I have no idea what weird ass version of FORTRAN you used, but every
version of FORTRAN I used, from IBM FORTRAN-G to Fortran-77 to Vax
Fortran
to Watfiv-S had it.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
`And when you've been *plonk*ed by Simon C., you've been *plonked*
by someone who knows when, and why, and how.' - Mike Andrews, asr

In a previous article, "Tom Sixkiller" said:
"The Weiss Family" wrote in message
...
Both FORTRAN and C have this keyword.
Boy, are we digressing. Is this a computer nerd forum ;-)

printf("Yes", %s);

Evidently it's a forum for *failed* nerds. (The format string comes first
in a printf function.)


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"How do you feel about women's rights?"
"I like either side of them."
-- Groucho Marx, 1890-1977

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
In a previous article, "Tom Sixkiller" said:
"The Weiss Family" wrote in message
...
Both FORTRAN and C have this keyword.
Boy, are we digressing. Is this a computer nerd forum ;-)

printf("Yes", %s);

Evidently it's a forum for *failed* nerds. (The format string comes first
in a printf function.)


Or maybe people that don't know the difference between a printf( ) function
and a prints( ) function.

Paul Tomblin wrote:

I have no idea what weird ass version of FORTRAN you used, but every
version of FORTRAN I used, from IBM FORTRAN-G to Fortran-77 to Vax Fortran
to Watfiv-S had it.

I used FORTRAN-E, FORTRAN-66, and TOPS-10. None of them had loop structure commands.

George Patterson
I childproofed my house, but they *still* get in.

In a previous article, "G.R. Patterson III" said:
Paul Tomblin wrote:

I have no idea what weird ass version of FORTRAN you used, but every
version of FORTRAN I used, from IBM FORTRAN-G to Fortran-77 to Vax Fortran
to Watfiv-S had it.

I used FORTRAN-E, FORTRAN-66, and TOPS-10. None of them had loop
structure commands.

That's not what CONTINUE did in FORTRAN - it was just a no-op for a
statement that needed a line number, like a DO loop target. And CONTINUE
was in FORTRAN I, as well as the FORTRAN-66 spec, so either you didn't
know your language very well, or the language you were using was lying
about being FORTRAN.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Ben Franklin

In article ,
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:

In a previous article, "G.R. Patterson III" said:
Paul Tomblin wrote:

I have no idea what weird ass version of FORTRAN you used, but every
version of FORTRAN I used, from IBM FORTRAN-G to Fortran-77 to Vax Fortran
to Watfiv-S had it.

I used FORTRAN-E, FORTRAN-66, and TOPS-10. None of them had loop
structure commands.

That's not what CONTINUE did in FORTRAN - it was just a no-op for a
statement that needed a line number, like a DO loop target. And CONTINUE
was in FORTRAN I, as well as the FORTRAN-66 spec, so either you didn't
know your language very well, or the language you were using was lying
about being FORTRAN.

Not to mention that TOPS-10 was an operating system, not a programming
language.