$640.00 to fill the tanks...

For static page markup, [html] was acceptable, but people kept
trying to beat it into something that it wasn't...

Yep. But the kludge works "well enough", so HTML is not being replaced.

Interestingly, web based "news readers" are becoming popular
replacements for real news clients, but RSS feeds (the "new thing") are
becoming popular too. If RSS had come first, even odds there would be
web based audio feeds that would be replacing the "old fashioned" RSS stuff.

Gag me with a TK50 !!!

Ok. (I've never done Pascal so I really have no opinion on it).

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 03:35:03 GMT, Jose
wrote:
Yep. But the kludge works "well enough", so HTML is not being replaced.

And for static web pages, it's acceptable... Dynamic web pages (i.e.
web applications) on the other hand are definitely a kludge... The
concept of having server side and client side code in the same file is
ugly from a design standpoint... I've written web apps before
utilizing Javascript, ASPs, and database access, so I do know
*something* about it and my informed opinion is that it is an ugly
design... Hell, it makes the old spaghetti code FORTRAN even look
good... In some ways, HTML is a progression from the old nroff and
troff text formatting... When they started trying to make it into
something that you could 'program' with is where they made their
mistake... On the other hand, Postscript is a real programming
language... A bit odd and more difficult to understand that your
typical Algol derived procedure oriented language, but a true
programming language none the less... Kind of like LISP, but
*different*... grin

Interestingly, web based "news readers" are becoming popular
replacements for real news clients, but RSS feeds (the "new thing") are
becoming popular too. If RSS had come first, even odds there would be
web based audio feeds that would be replacing the "old fashioned" RSS
stuff.

Depends upon what you are calling "news readers"... Do you mean "news"
as in USENET or "news" as in current events? RSS from what I
understand is the latter... I have never read anything about it doing
USENET... With respect to "news" as in current events, I don't have a
problem with it being in standard HTML since the end result is that
I'm using the computer as a replacment for some printed media...
Allowing the source of the information to have control over the actual
formatting / display of the information is not really objectionable to
me...

Ok. (I've never done Pascal so I really have no opinion on it).

It's better than BASIC, but that's about it... Personally, I don't
like a language that is too strongly typed... I like the capability of
being able to refer to a particular area of memory by various types...
I like the fact that with 'C', I will know exactly how my data is laid
out in memory... One thing that I used to tell students who were
considering taking a 'C' course was that if they couldn't handle
pointers, they should stay away from 'C'... 'C' does not just allow
you to shoot yourself in the foot... It provides you with a fully
automatic 12-gauge, rests the end of the barrel on your foot, and only
allows you to pick it up by the trigger which just so happens to have
a 1 gram trigger pull... It's difficult to find a language that is
more efficient yet still allows you high level language structures...

In article ,
Grumman-581 wrote:

I've done Ada for NASA many years ago and even they eventually saw the
error in their ways and and went back to 'C'... Pascal is not even a
contender... Modula-II is quite a bit better than Pascal, but I'll
stay with C/C++ anyday...

yeah - C is a wonderful programming language for critical software.

not.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

And for static web pages, it's acceptable.

Alas, there are precious few static web pages nowadays - it seems people
want to show off how cool they are by stuffing the pipe. I've seen
flash used to encapsulate a static image which held nothing but text. Feh.

Depends upon what you are calling "news readers"...
Do you mean "news" as in USENET...?

Yes. Those kinds of readers are specially designed for message boards.

RSS is similar in that it is especially designed for media (podcasting
and the like). Whatever came last squeezes out whatever came first,
irrespective of quality or appropriateness. So, HTML squoze
newsreaders, and RSS is squeezing HTML (et al).

Allowing the source of the information to have control over the actual
formatting / display of the information is not really objectionable to
me...

It's very objectionable to me, since it ignores the capabilities (or
lack of them) and permissions (or lack of them) of the device upon which
the information is to be displayed, and the wishes of the one who will
actually use the information.

and only allows you to pick it up by the trigger

LOL!

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Grumman-581 wrote:

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 02:34:57 GMT, Matt Whiting
wrote:

I ended up deciding it was easier to leave programming for management
than to learn a language as messed up as C++.


Those who CAN, DO... Those who CAN'T, go to management... grin

.... and make twice as much money. big grin

Matt

Bob Noel wrote:

In article ,
Grumman-581 wrote:


I've done Ada for NASA many years ago and even they eventually saw the
error in their ways and and went back to 'C'... Pascal is not even a
contender... Modula-II is quite a bit better than Pascal, but I'll
stay with C/C++ anyday...


yeah - C is a wonderful programming language for critical software.

You have me worried...

not.

Oh, much better now.

Yes, C is great for those who don't much care about the quality of their
software, which, unfortunately, is the preponderance of programmers.

Matt

Grumman-581 wrote:

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 01:49:16 GMT, Matt Whiting
wrote:

I was expecting that. C has held back software development more than
any other language invented. C is what assembly should have been, but
it certainly sucks as a "high level" language.


If you do it right, 'C' can be object oriented... It might not have
all the features of C++, but one could argue that quite a few of the
C++ features are either not needed or rarely used... I like a lot of
the features in C++, but more often than not, I end up writing
straight 'C' since at least one of the machines upon which my system
is executing does not have a C++ compiler...

Object-oriented is passe now. Try to keep up! :-)

Matt

Grumman-581 wrote:

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 01:25:09 GMT, Jose
wrote:

Anything is better than HTML. Of course "better" depends on the use to
which it is put, and HTML is not really being put to the uses it was
intended for. Not being an expert in the internet, I don't have much to
offer as an improvement, but I know a kludge when I see it.


HTML for web pages is a "What You See Is What You *Might* Get" type of
system... For static page markup, it was acceptable, but people kept
trying to beat it into something that it wasn't...

Yes, just like with C. It was intended as a system-level language that
was easier to use than assembly language. And then people started using
it for application level software and things went to heck in a handbasket.

Matt

"Grumman-581" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 02:04:02 GMT, Jose
wrote:
It's not a high level language. Maybe Pascal would fit.

Gag me with a TK50 !!!

I've done Ada for NASA many years ago and even they eventually saw the
error in their ways and and went back to 'C'... Pascal is not even a
contender... Modula-II is quite a bit better than Pascal, but I'll
stay with C/C++ anyday...

(My last programming was 1990-1...and that was just to get some elaborate
weight shift calculations done, Borland's Turbo C. I even keep some of the
other stuff)

__ _ /|
\'o.O '
=(___)=

U Ack! Phfft!

Real Programmers...

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They like twinkies, coke and
palate-scorching Szechwan food.
Real Programmers don't write applications programs. They program
right down on the bare metal. Applications programming is for the
dullards who can't do systems programming.
Real Programmers don't write specs. Users should be grateful for
whatever they get: they are lucky to get any programs at all.
Real Programmers don't comment their code. If it was hard to write,
it should be hard to understand and harder to modify.
Real Programmers don't document. Documentation is for simpletons
who can't read listings or the object code from the dump.
Real Programmers don't draw flowcharts. Flowcharts are the illiterate's
form of documentation. Cavemen drew flowcharts; look at how much
good it did for them.
Real Programmers don't read manuals. Reliance on a reference manual
is the hallmark of the novice and the coward.
Real Programmers don't write in RPG. RPG is for gum-chewing dimwits
who maintain ancient payroll programs.
Real Programmers don't write in COBOL. COBOL is for COmmon Business-
Oriented Laymen who can't run a business, much less write a real
program.
Real Programmers don't write in FORTRAN. FORTRAN is for wimp engineers
who wear white socks. They get excited over finite state analysis and
nuclear reactor simulation.
Real Programmers don't write in PL/1. PL/1 is for insecure anal-retentives
who can't choose between COBOL and FORTRAN.
Real Programmers don't write in BASIC. Actually, no programmer writes
in BASIC after reaching puberty.
Real Programmers don't write in APL, unless the whole program can be
written on one line.
Real Programmers don't write in LISP. Only idiots' programs contain
more parenthesis than actual code.
Real Programmers don't write in PASCAL, BLISS, ADA, or any of those
other sissy computer science languages. Strong typing is the crutch
for people with weak minds.
Real Programmers' programs never work right the first time. But if you
throw them on the machine they can be patched into working order in
"only a few" 30-hour debugging sessions.
Real Programmers never work 9 to 5. If any Real Programmers are around
at 9:00 am, its because they were up all night.
Real Programmers don't play tennis, or any other sport which requires
a change of clothes. Mountain Climbing is acceptable.
Real Programmers wear climbing boots to work in case a mountain should
suddenly spring up in the middle of the machine room.
Real Programmers disdain structured programming. Structured programming
is for compulsive neurotics who were permanently toilet trained. They
wear neckties and carefully line up sharp pencils on an otherwise clear
desk.
Real Programmers don't like the team programming concept. Unless, of
course they are the chief programmer.
Real Programmers never write memos on paper. They send memos via computer
mail networks.
Real Programmers have no use for managers. Managers are a necessary evil.
They exist only to deal with personnel bozos, bean counters, senior
planners,
and other mental defectives.
Real Programmers scorn floating point arithmetic. The decimal point was
invented for pansy bedwetters who are unable to "think big."
Real Programmers don't drive clapped-out Mavericks. They prefer BMW's,
Porsches, or pick up trucks with floor shifts. Fast motorcycles are highly
regarded.
Real Programmers don't believe in schedules. Planners make up schedules.
Managers "firm up" schedules. Frightened coders strive to meet schedules.
Real Programmers ignore schedules.

Yes, C is great for those who don't much care about the quality of their software, which, unfortunately, is the preponderance of programmers.

C is great for those who care a lot about the quality of their own work,
and therefore don't rely on the language to catch them.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.