[Info-vax] Whither VMS?

[Richard B. Gilbert]

Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> In article <pMWdnUsa5dUmyVDXnZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d at giganews.com>,
> 	"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88 at comcast.net> writes:
>> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>> In article <nuvpc5ppo1sdropbtajvfdas7t7l6i5mbk at 4ax.com>,
>>> 	jls <notvalid at yahoo.com> writes:
>>>> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:48:02 -0400, "Richard B. Gilbert"
>>>> <rgilbert88 at comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Bob Koehler wrote:
>>>>>> In article <7ire14F32vm9nU2 at mid.individual.net>, billg999 at cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>>>>>> And once again we blame the language for the incompetence (or just plain
>>>>>>> laziness) of the programmers.
>>>>>>    That's like blaiming the carpenter who loses his hand to a circular
>>>>>>    saw without a blade guard.  The saw should have had the blade guard.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Yes but the carpenter should not have used a power saw without a blade 
>>>>> guard.  You may remove or disable blade guards for your convenience but 
>>>>> if you do you deserve whatever happens to you.
>>>> The analogy between C programming and the blade guard on the saw would
>>>> make sense to me if we agreed that C programming "guards" are similar
>>>> to me buying a saw, but having to build my own blade guard to keep
>>>> safe.
>>>>
>>>> In the saw's blade guard example, though, the company that makes the
>>>> saw designs and implements the blade guard on the product.  There is
>>>> no such thing for C programming, and instead everyone is left to
>>>> implement their own safeguards.
>>> You are assuming the analogy was the guard when in fact it is the proper
>>> use of the tool.  Using the saw without a guard is improper use.  Writing
>>> C programs without the proper knowledge of the effects of various actions
>>> resulting in bad programs is not the languages fault.
>>>
>>> And for those who seem to think this is a C unique problem, I have seen
>>> numerous overflow problems in both COBOL and Fortran programs.  I have
>>> even written programs in COBOL to specifically demonstrate that behaviour.
>>> I have seen programs in Fortran that had wierd "segment violation" (for
>>> want a better term) errors that just seemed to disappear when a programmer
>>> inserted PRINT statements into the code to try and debug it.  Anyone care
>>> to guess why this would happen?  :-)
>>>
>>
>> Show me the Fortran code and I can probably figure it out.  I used to do 
>> that sort of thing for a living 1970-1994.  If you have a WATFOR or 
>> WATFIV compiler it will probably point out one or more errors in the code.
>  
> Sorry, that was almost 30 years ago when I, too, was doing it for
> living.  It was  Fortran IV on a Univac 1100 running Exec-8.  Of
> course, the programs in question were also proof that it is not
> only C that gets used for the wrong purposes.  These were business
> applications written in Fortran by engineers who needed something
> to doto keep them busy during slow summers.  Fortran was the only
> language they knew.

You have to start somewhere and where that is depends strongly on the 
circumstances.  SDS 900 series assembler was my first language.  Later 
on, I learned COBOL (Computer Programming 101-102 - University of 
Virginia).  I taught myself Fortran from D.D. McCracken's "Guide to 
Fortran IV Programming".  There was a guy who knew how to write!
I then learned IBM System/360 assembler.  I did a little Pascal, PL/1,
IBM System 360 assembler, VAX Macro (device driver), etc, etc.