On 01/-10/-28163 02:59 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Tim Chase wrote:
On 07/17/2011 08:01 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Roy Smith wrote:
We don't have that problem any more. It truly boggles my
mind that we're still churning out people with 80 column
minds. I'm willing to entertain arguments about readability
of long lines, but the idea that there's something magic
about 80 columns is hogwash.
I agree! Which is why I set my line width to 78 columns.
Bah, when I started programming
on the Apple ][+, we had no
lower-case and a 40-column limit
on the TV display.
But you try and tell the young
people today that...
and they won't believe ya'.
40 columns? Luxury! My first computer was a Hewlett Packard 28S handheld
programmable calculator, with 22 columns[1] and 32 entire kilobytes of
memory!
(I don't include my previous programmable calculator, a Casio, or was it a
Canon, as the programming language included wasn't Turing Complete.)
[1] I think it was 22 columns -- that's what my HP 48GX has, and I'm sure
the 28S screen was no larger.
My first programmable calculator had 1.5k of RAM, display was 13 digits
wide, and it took an optional 2k of PROM via a plugin socket on top. I
wrote a commercially sold navigation program for that calculator. The
program was used on ships in 1974 and later. Later I squeezed the code
a bit and made room for a dead reckoning program and great circle
calculator.
I didn't write a cross assembler for it till after this project was
finished. That assembler ran on a machine with 64 column display.
DaveA
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
