Slashdot Mirror


RIP: Betty Holberton, Original Eniac Programmer

DecoDragon writes "Betty Holberton, one of the original ENIAC programmers, died on December 8th. An obituary describing her many achivements as well as her work on the ENIAC can be found in the Washington Post. Her accomplishments included contributing to the development of Cobol and Fortran, and coming up with using mnemonic characters for commands (i.e. a for add). She was awarded the Lovelace Award for extraordinary acomplishments in computing from the Asssociation for Women in Computing, and the Computer Pioneer Award from the IEEE Computer Society for "development of the first sort-merge generator for the Univac which inspired the first ideas about compilation.""

154 comments

  1. The TTBs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The TTBs weep for her.

  2. Big ass memorial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    They should errect the ENIAC like the Vietnam Wall somewhere and scrawl all the dude's names on the back of it... ;)

    1. Re:Big ass memorial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Women of her generation only did a single dude, and then they married him. Omigod! According to my calculations based on her age at death, this women begat geek children, who begat geek children, who begat... slashdot!

      Why didnt anyone think to stop her? Now its too late to save the world from being boring.

    2. Re:Big ass memorial by vax · · Score: 1

      it seems only fair, after all the not so glam pioneers of computers still need to be remembered, and in my opinion more so that thier galm counter parts. Iam glad slashdot posted this its good to know they intresting things that are not microsoft related (at all) are still being posted. It occured to me that inadvertaintly slashdot is giving microsoft free advertising by putting them up on a (what seems like) weekly baisis, i dont know about the rest of you but iam a bit tired of hearing microsoft does this and microsoft is doing that in court (doesn anyone care anymore? i dont) heh well keep up the good articles guys
      peace love and free thinking
      VAX

      ..

    3. Re:Big ass memorial by eam · · Score: 1
      Well, they still have a piece of ENIAC here at Penn in the ENIAC museum. Someone could probably suggest it to the dude who runs the museum. When I was working there it was Paul Shaffer, and it probably still is.

      FYI: If you want to visit ENIAC (well, a piece of it), the Museum is on the ground floor of the Moore bldg. at 33rd & Walnut in Philadelphia, PA.

    4. Re:Big ass memorial by Yunzil · · Score: 1
      They should errect the ENIAC like the Vietnam Wall somewhere


      Pieces of ENIAC are on display at the Smithsonian American History Museum.

  3. Loss and Gain by The+Great+Wakka · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sometimes, the world loses a great person. While her accomplishments may seem minor compared to those of the modern-day programmers, she laid an important stone in the foundation of modern computer science. Can you imagine life without her? One whole section of a computer's logic would be eliminated. Perhaps she made some obscure discovery that tomorrow will change the way we think about computers.

    --
    Everything is mainstream now.
    1. Re:Loss and Gain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll
      Can you imagine life without her? One whole section of a computer's logic would be eliminated.

      Dude, it was a mnemonic. She didn't invent addition.

    2. Re:Loss and Gain by Safety+Cap · · Score: 2
      Can you imagine life without her?
      What's sad is that she's one of the pioneers who was underappreciated ("semi-professional"... WTF is that?) in her time, and virtually unknown today -- yet she's directly/indirectly responsible for many of the things we take for granted.

      The average John Q. Public neither knows nor cares about people like that, but doesn't think twice when he sorts a column on his spreadsheet. Perhaps he should.

      --
      Yeah, right.
    3. Re:Loss and Gain by selan · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I realize that your comment was meant as praise, but it really belittles what she achieved.

      How could her accomplishments possibly be minor compared with today's programmers? Today we may code operating systems or apps, but she helped to invent programming. She did "change the way we think about computers."

      Read the obit first, it's very interesting and you might actually learn something.

    4. Re:Loss and Gain by Usquebaugh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "One whole section of a computer's logic would be eliminated."

      I doubt it, probably just attributed to another person. There are very few ideas that are not part of the society they spring from. It just depends on who is recognised as being first.

    5. Re:Loss and Gain by andres32a · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Perhaps she made some obscure discovery that tomorrow will change the way we think about computers.

      Actually she did. We know that software has not progressed as far as hardware. Most of it's relative progress was made by the original ENIAC TEAM. And Betty more than anybody else on that team wanting something that most of modern day programers are also hoping for... make computers fun, user fiendly and a good part of our daily life.

    6. Re:Loss and Gain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called karma whoring.

    7. Re:Loss and Gain by Omerna · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One thing I've noticed is almost always another person is noted as having invented the exact thing at the same time, but weren't officially recognized as "first" so they don't get any credit. The first example that comes to mind is the Periodic Table- Mendeleev was credited, but another guy (anyone remember his name? I can't) did the same thing very slightly differently at the same time (I mean invented a table with the elements arranged like this, not an improvement upon it) and gets no credit because Mendeleev was recognized as first!

      Anyway, the point is yeah, it would definitely have been invented within a few years (months?) of when it was.

      --


      No sig for you.
    8. Re:Loss and Gain by eddy+the+lip · · Score: 1

      nobody bloody reads anything anymore. if you can't be bothered to more than skim the summaries, how can you bother posting (or moderating. yes, i mean you, who modded this up insightful). if you had, you would have seen the bit that referred to the work she did that was pivotal in the creation of these things called compilers. you know, things that turns code into more things computers understand.

      granted, it was a the end of the article, and "generator" and "compilation" have four syllables apiece, so i should probably cut you some slack...

      --

      This is the voice of World Control. I bring you Peace.

    9. Re:Loss and Gain by vax · · Score: 1

      leave it to the Anonymous Cowards to mock significant acheivements, all i have to say to you is your name suits you well. perhaps when you grow up you will learn to take your critizims by a real name.
      VAX

      ...

    10. Re:Loss and Gain by NonSequor · · Score: 3, Funny

      Computers already are user fiendly.

      --
      My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
  4. Bug by genkael · · Score: 1, Informative

    Isn't she also the person who coined the term "bug" after finding a moth in the system that was shorting it out?

    --
    GeneralKael -- Slacker Extraordinaire
    1. Re:Bug by ckuske · · Score: 1

      Nope, that was Grace Hopper.

    2. Re:Bug by blair1q · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's more attributable to Grace Hopper, but she didn't coin it, she just made a joke of it, pasting the moth in her lab notebook and annotating it "first real bug".

      --Blair

  5. Something to think about. by Matt2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful


    From the article "By the completion of the ENIAC project in 1946, work that once took 30 hours to compute instead took 15 seconds."

    Since most of us were born after the advent of computers we take for granted that mundane computation tasks can be automated for fairly low cost and at great time savings. However, for all that technological progress has been hailed in the last 20 years, is there any task that we have received this kind of improvement in efficiency on?

    Are we becoming too focused on the day to day improvements in computing, each one of ever decreasing relevance to people who actually use the computer?

    How can we focus more in the future on finding the areas where our efforts can be best utilized to produce efficiency gains of this sort, rather than Microsofting everything by putting 74 new features into a product just so a new product can be sold?

    These kind of questions stand as the things that can best be answered by open source, where we are not constrained by profit. This should be what we think about in the future, rather than what featuress we can copy from someone else's software just because they have it and we don't.

    --

    1. Re:Something to think about. by MisterBlister · · Score: 4, Interesting
      This may come off sounding like a flame, but I don't intend it to -- I fully support the notion of Open Source software and have released various bits of OSS myself.

      Having said that, for OSS to foster the giant leap forward that you suggest would require a large shift in the way people look at and create OSS. The simple truth is that 99.99% of all OSS is just reinvention of closed source software to scratch an itch or for political reasons. This is not the type of environment in which such a leap springs forth.

      While Open Source has many benefits, it would take an awful lot for me to agree with your premise that its more well suited than closed source for the type of efficency gain you're looking for. Such leaps are often made by one or very few people, with everyone else following later. Given that, such a leap is just as likely to occur with plain-old closed source as with OSS.

    2. Re:Something to think about. by LordNimon · · Score: 2
      Open Source is not some kind of new paradigm of computing, it is simply a development and distribution model, and not a new one either. There's nothing "special" about open source. In fact, considering how open source, by definition, results in lower revenue for the developers, I would expect more innovations to occur in closed source code. After all, the more money that a company makes, the more it can invest into R&D.

      Of course, there are excpetions, but they are only exceptions.

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    3. Re:Something to think about. by devphil · · Score: 2
      "Computers make it easier to do a lot of things. Trouble is, most of those things don't need to be done."

      (Somebody wanna help me with who said that?)

      --
      You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
    4. Re:Something to think about. by nusuth · · Score: 2
      Forget open source for a revolution, next big thing will be affordable computers surpassing human brains in computational power, which could happen in thirty years if moore's law continues to hold, and our estimates about brain's processing capacity is not very misguided. Building one today for just half a million top-end processors, and billions of dollars will do no good, AI researchers must be able access such machines for long time periods.

      The next BIG thing will be actually putting that processing power to use, building machines more intelligent than ourselves. I can't see how that can not happen, maybe it will take much longer than 30 years but I'm pretty sure the number is closer to 30 than 300.

      Anything else happening in the period are just details, minor details.

      --

      Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the War Room!

    5. Re:Something to think about. by rp · · Score: 1
      From the article "By the completion of the ENIAC project in 1946, work that once took 30 hours to compute instead took 15 seconds."

      Since most of us were born after the advent of computers we take for granted that mundane computation tasks can be automated for fairly low cost and at great time savings. However, for all that technological progress has been hailed in the last 20 years, is there any task that we have received this kind of improvement in efficiency on?

      Yes, the WWW and Google achieve a similar speedup for looking up information. Only for more advanced topics in non-computer related areas we have to resort to libraries or phone calls these days.

    6. Re:Something to think about. by Saeger · · Score: 1
      Open Source concepts still apply in an AI future.

      Even though the actual AI developed (and GP evolved) systems, and the AI itself, would grow too complex for any human to understand, that doesn't mean that the slave-owner/author wouldn't still want the "neuralnet source" (or whatever) to be made available free (as in speech & beer).

      e.g. The Open Learned Common Knowledge Base vs. Microsoft StreetSmart(TM). With MS, if they still existed, they would want to hold you hostage with a subscription to a proprietary central AI slavefarm, while the "OSS community" would network their cheap "brains" to greater effect for the common good.

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
  6. Picture of the bug by bstadil · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It was Gace Hopper Look at this site they have picture of the Bug.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
    1. Re:Picture of the bug by Teratogen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I actually met Grace Hopper when I was a Multics programmer for the Air Force at the Pentagon, back in 1982 or 1983. She was shopping at the Walgreens in the Pentagon Concourse. I introduced myself to her and we talked for a bit. I kick myself repeatedly for not getting her to autograph a Cobol printout for me. =)

      --
      --- even the safest course is fraught with peril
    2. Re:Picture of the bug by Yunzil · · Score: 1
      Look at this site [vt.edu] they have picture of the Bug.


      Pfft, picture. I saw the real thing. For a while they had it on display at the Smithsonian. :)

  7. I guess she finally decided to ... by WillSeattle · · Score: 2

    decompile her code.

    Another one for the bit bucket ...

    while my compiler gently weeps ...

    -

    --
    --- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
  8. Full info... by kikta · · Score: 3, Interesting

    See the page on 1945, where it says:

    "Grace Murray Hopper, working in a temporary World War I building at Harvard University on the Mark II computer, found the first computer bug beaten to death in the jaws of a relay. She glued it into the logbook of the computer and thereafter when the machine stops (frequently) they tell Howard Aiken that they are "debugging" the computer. The very first bug still exists in the National Museum of American History of the Smithsonian Institution. The word bug and the concept of debugging had been used previously, perhaps by Edison, but this was probably the first verification that the concept applied to computers."

  9. Re:dance on her grave by MisterBlister · · Score: 4, Insightful
    COBOL and FORTRAN were both wildly successful computer languages. They may seem a bit dated now, but considering their age and the fact that they were designed to work well on computers that are ridiculously less powerful than the system you have now (even if you're using a 286!) and factoring in that they were some of the first high level computer languages, with little research or history to draw upon, they were rather amazing accomplishments.

    What languages have YOU designed?

  10. Re:I just saw a video with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    URL plz?

  11. The Origin of Pale Grey Boxes, etc. by Alien54 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    While engineers focused on the technology of computing, Mrs. Holberton lay awake nights thinking about human thought processes, she later told interviewers. - - - She came up with language using mnemonic characters that appealed to logic, such as "a" for add and "b" for bring. She designed control panels that put the numeric keypad next to the keyboard and persuaded engineers to replace the UNIVAC's black exterior with the gray-beige tone that came to be the universal color of computers.

    Now we got folks who what their case midnight black.

    But given all of the design issues we have seen, it is interesting to note that the human interface problem was being considered from the very beginning.

    [Insert your Microsoft insult joke here]

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
    1. Re:The Origin of Pale Grey Boxes, etc. by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 2, Funny

      "[...] and persuaded engineers to replace the UNIVAC's black exterior with the gray-beige tone that came to be the universal color of computers."

      Just goes to show, that even great minds make cockups from time to time!

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
  12. Betty Picture by andres32a · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is a nice picture a her here. just if anyone is interested...

    1. Re:Betty Picture by ardiri · · Score: 1

      eek.. just as scary as our goatse friends! any 20-30 year old pics of this woman :) that 70+ year old pic scared me :)

    2. Re:Betty Picture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, I curse you to one of two fates...you get to choose:

      1. You die at 40, missing out on the horrors of old age. Of course, you'll miss out on the joys that outweigh the horrors, but that's life.

      2. You outlive everyone you knew and loved and in you last years encounter only the kind of disrespect for the aged that you yourself had in your youth.

      Thus hath it been spoken; so mote it be!

  13. Re:dance on her grave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i'd tell you, but that would reveal my true identity

    sure a hell sight better than cobol and fortran

  14. The most irritating part of it... by Eryq · · Score: 4, Redundant

    I got my master's in Comp Sci at UPenn in '89 (I used to walk past some of the remnants of ENIAC on display there, every day). And I can't help but be saddened by this:

    She hoped to major in the field [mathematics] at the University of Pennsylvania but was discouraged by a professor who thought that women belonged at home.

    I'm glad she finally got her chance to shine during the war, but who knows what else she might have accomplished, had someone's idiotic prejudices not dissuaded her into working for the Farm Journal?

    Stupid git.

    Then again, maybe he just meant /home...

    --
    I'm a bloodsucking fiend! Look at my outfit!
    1. Re:The most irritating part of it... by dillon_rinker · · Score: 2

      I'm glad she finally got her chance to shine during the war, but who knows what else she might have accomplished, had someone's idiotic prejudices not dissuaded her into working for the Farm Journal?

      Don't dis serendipity. Had she not been discouraged, her life would not have taken the course it had. She's little more than a footnote in history, and computer history at that, but how many of the billions who have lived can even claim that? Had she gone on to major in mathematics, she might have become...a math teacher. Or perhaps she would have gotten her PhD and disappeared into research, occasionally publishing obscure monographs on semihemidemigroup homologies.

  15. Parrallel processing from the start. by Alien54 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The Army chose six women, including Mrs. Holberton, to program the ENIAC, which weighed 30 tons and filled a room. The women had to route data and electronic pulses through 3,000 switches, 18,000 vacuum tubes and dozens of cables.

    "There were no manuals," one of the women, Kay McNulty Mauchley Antonelli, later told Kathleen Melymuka for an interview in Computer World. "They gave us all the blueprints, and we could ask the engineers anything. We had to learn how the machine was built, what each tube did. We had to study how the machine worked and figure out how to do a job on it. So we went right ahead and taught ourselves how to program."

    Mrs. Holberton took responsibility for the central unit that directed program sequences. Because the ENIAC was a parallel processor that could execute multiple program sections at once, programming the master unit was the toughest challenge of her 50-year career, she later told Kleiman.

    Now that is a programming challenge.

    Imagine that the first programs were parrallel processing problems from the start, with no manuals or instructions in programing because they had to invent it all first. And the pressure of being in wartime as well.

    very impressive indeed. one of those things that get done because no one knows it is impossible yet.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  16. Female Programmers by Lunastorm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And I've always thought that the first programmers were all men. I do wonder: is there is a higher percentage of female programmers today or has it fallen in time?
    As for those who are belittling her use of mnemonics, you shouldn't take it for granted. Imagine having to type out 'file system consistency checker' instead of fsck among other commands.

    --
    You die too easily.
    1. Re:Female Programmers by os2fan · · Score: 2
      Regarding mnenotics, Imagine having to type something like JMP377 with the right tape loaded instead of typing in fsck.

      My first computer I used was something like an 8086 (I think). The way you booted it was to load up a paper tape, and manually insert the boot sector at a specific address, and then manually press the go secuence (by loading in something like 377.

      This loaded a driver for the teletype machine, which you could enter assembler codes (as numbers). Mnemotics like "a" for add and "b" for bring would have been an achievement worth speaking of.

      --
      OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
    2. Re:Female Programmers by devphil · · Score: 5, Insightful


      No, it's a question of perceived status. At that time, being a computer -- recall that 'computer' was the title of the person doing the math, not the noisy room-sized thing you did the math on -- was considered something of a drudge job. The men discovered the algorithms, the women did the computing.

      Later, as the idea of working with a (machine) computer as a career became more fashionable, more and more men moved into the field, as it was no longer considered "merely" women's work.

      Remember Lady Ada Lovelace, the first programmer? Babbage couldn't be bothered to do the menial work of actually designing algorithms. Then the act of designing algorithms lost some of its stigma, and men took over. Finally the act of actually coding the algorithms has lost its stigma, and so I (a male) can sit here making a fabulous living as a coder, while my equally-talented coder girlfriend doesn't make as much money.

      The glass ceiling is still there. It just shifts up and down to include/exclude different professions as culture changes. :-(

      --
      You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
    3. Re:Female Programmers by Suppafly · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The original computer programmers were all women, because there was the thought at the time that they would be better at working with computers than men since they would be transisting over from typing pools and from working as jobs at telephone operators, all which were seen as womens job. There is also the thought that women were better at math than a lot of men, which is why women that couldn't get accepted into mathematics programs went into the budding computer field where they were more readily accepted.

    4. Re:Female Programmers by CatherineCornelius · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't think it's realistic to attempt to pin the development of memonic programming concepts on one person--the first mnemonic assembler language was probably developed for the EDSAC at Cambridge, England, some time before UNIVAC ran its first program.
      Programming ENIAC must have been a challenge, because what you had was basically a set of vacuum tube shift registers and whatnot that had to be wired together for a given purpose using patchboards.

    5. Re:Female Programmers by MrResistor · · Score: 2
      Regarding mnenotics, Imagine having to type something like JMP377 with the right tape loaded instead of typing in fsck.

      Except, JMP is a mnemonic, so you'd just have to know the code for "jump" (which was 303 for the 8080) as well as the address you wanted to jump to (which would be 377 in your example).

      My first coding class was assembly on 8080 workstations which had an octal keypad for input and 3 rows of 8 LEDs for output. It sucked. When we finally got to use Z80 workstations with keyboards and monitors we had a true appreciation for the blessing of mnemonics! Stored memory didn't seem so cool, though. It was less painful to retype in my program every day than to have to deal with those stupid cassette drives.

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    6. Re:Female Programmers by os2fan · · Score: 1
      The point I was making is that in Basic and Assembler, you go to a particular address, not a named function. Had I written 303 377, you may not had appreciated the point.

      In the end, with the Basic RPN calculator, I used magic numbers to control the flow. This allowed for fewer labels, and robust code. The magic cookies were used to control the fan-out, with pre-testing of values (eg divide by 0) before it was attempted.

      When the subroutine was done, it passed back magic cookies to indicate error codes, and its result in PA(0). It was up to the display module to announce the error message and deal with PA(0).

      The message stack was also used for other things as well: you could peek at any register of the calculator.

      But whatever it was, the codes were laid out so that all functions that would crash on DIV0 were together, all functions that required the range -1 to +1 were together, and so forth.

      For the record, I used six magic cookies, in two sets of three. In half the cycle, set A would be controlling the flow, and set B were scratch data, while the other half B controls the flow, and A is the scratch data.

      This greatly reduced the number of GOTO and GOSUB lines. I think in the end, there were 10 different labels of major jumps.

      As for tweaking code: I still do it to great effect. I can still pull 8x increase in speed by selecting the correct algorithms.

      --
      OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
    7. Re:Female Programmers by biobogonics · · Score: 1

      And I've always thought that the first programmers were all men. I do wonder: is there is a higher percentage of female programmers today or has it fallen in time?

      Actually, Eve was the first programmer. She had an Apple in one hand and a Wang in the other.

    8. Re:Female Programmers by grahamm · · Score: 2

      And Grace Hopper, one of the pioneers of high level languages and compilers.

    9. Re:Female Programmers by dillon_rinker · · Score: 2

      women were better at math
      To clarify the - women were better at tedious arithmetical calculation. Men were obviously better than women at math(ematics) because there were almost no women mathematicians.

      At least, that was the misconception of the time...

  17. roof*roof* Rurn roff ra rights raggy *roof*roof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    "I know what you mean, scoob, ol' buddy. she ain't much of teen hearthrobb. She is... uhhhhhhhhh-gleeeeeeeeeeeee whith a capital YUCK in my dictionary. Oh why does Fredie and Daphne always go off together and me, you, and thelma get chased by the ghouls and ghosts?"

  18. i think is safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to say this column is being handled mostly by guy's... im not saying thats bad thing... is just a fact ;)

  19. Re:More Revisionist History by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Crack open a history book or go to the Museum of American History in D.C., before you start ranting about "revisionist history". The whole article is ON THE LEVEL.

    And she did software AND hardware; they programmed by soldering and wiring back then.
    It was in the 1940s BEFORE THERE WERE EVEN COMPILERS: whaddya think they used?

    Wassamatta? Can't bear the though that someone without a penis did something important, while nobody gives a damn about YOUR accomplishments? Got a little vagina envy maybe, HMMM?

    But don't worry. I'm sure if you get properly laid someday, you'll see things differently...

  20. Re:dance on her grave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    COBOL _is_ dated, but FORTRAN's still around, and continuously evolving, similarly to C/C++ etc - Fortran 95 is about as similar to FORTRAN-77 as C++ is to BCPL. THere's no good GPL/free Fortran 95 compilers yet, though there is a project to make one for gcc.

  21. Re:dance on her grave by DGolden · · Score: 1

    Yes, Java is the new COBOL. No, seriously - it's being used everywhere COBOL used to be in businesses. MS wants a piece of that market, and, no doubt, will get some, with C#.

    --
    Choice of masters is not freedom.
  22. No, that would be Grace Hopper by devphil · · Score: 2


    Admiral Grace Hopper to you. :-)

    --
    You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
    1. Re:No, that would be Grace Hopper by Irvu · · Score: 1

      Rear Admiral Grace Murray Hopper.

      When she retired in 1986 at the age of 79 she was the oldest commissioned navy officer onactive duty. The retiement ceremony was held on the U.S.S Constitution which is also still on active duty.

      I guess any woman tough enough to do what they did when they did (not sit at home) doesn't like to quit.

  23. Re:Fortran: Bill Gates' favorite programming langu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ahahah, that's some straight up funny shit ('cause it's soo true), mod this one up!

  24. Re:Fortran: Bill Gates' favorite programming langu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Haha! Yes, I have to completely agree! So funny, yet so true!

  25. Re:women and computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HAHAHAHAHA, this is some good shit man! these fucking slashdot nerds are fucked in the head. bunch of scrawny 130lb computer nerds with four eyes and shit. you hit the nail on the head with the one, my friend. mod this up!

  26. Nope.... by NickFusion · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The folk etymology of "bug" is that, in the early days of electronic computing, an actual insect flew into the innards of the Harvard Mark II, and caused a malfunction (this did happen), and that is where we get the word bug (in the sense of a flaw in the process). It seems however that the word was already in use in that sense in industrial manufacturing circles at the end of the 19th century.

    (New Hacker's Dictionary)

    --
    What were you expecting?
  27. 'a for add' ?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She should be burned in effigy

    Seriously though, it's still a big problem that women are underrepresented in comp sci./programming. While I don't particularily respect Cobol and Fortran as languages, I really respect the technical hurdles that the pioneers faced and the personal/scientific achievements of people like the dearly departed.

    The worst part is that it occurs to me that the majority of us haven't learned to leave this legacy behind (rant on archaic languages and programming techniques) and the lack of real progress in this respect. 50 years and we don't have a significantly better language than Smalltalk (ok, maybe Lisp).

    1. Re:'a for add' ?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about Modula-2?

      Or ADA?

      At least good compilers were written for the former.

      No matter what language you think is good, a female will have more difficulty using it than her average male counterpart.

    2. Re:'a for add' ?!? by SuzanneA · · Score: 1
      50 years and we don't have a significantly better language than Smalltalk

      Eh? Smalltalk isn't THAT old, its only 20 years old (the original spec was Smalltalk-80 after all). That makes it newer than Lisp, C, Fortran, Cobol, most Algol derived languages, etc.

      Common lisp dates back to around the same time as smalltalk (81-82ish), but original Lisp dates back to the fairly early days of computing ('58 ish).

      ADA dates back to around 79-80, though the original DOD study goes back a couple of years earlier.

      The fact is, very few successful languages have appeared in the last 20 years. Most of the post-1980 languages are extensions/redesigns of existing languages (C->C++, Pascal->Modula/Oberon series, Fortran->F90). About the only sucessful 'language' that is totally original that has appeared in the last 20 years, that I can think of, is Perl.

  28. To a great geek, from a proud one, I salute you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ms. Holberton, this Jolt's for you. You are one of the few early computer geek vetrans of war, an honor that few can claim. Thank you for what you have done for my country, and my profession.

  29. Wheelier wheel by NickFusion · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So what are you suggesting, that we invent a wheel that is an order of magnitude...wheelier?

    We're talking about a basic shift in the way things are done, from humans adding colums of numbers to an industrial number-adding machine.

    You don't get the next big thing from microsoft, or from open source, or from programming at all.

    You get it from inventing the next widget that automates, streamlines, accelerates some human activity.

    What is it? A better word processor? Nope. Who knows. An automated intuiter? An enlarged and speed up memory core for the human brain? Something that turns dioxin into peanut butter?

    Ginger?

    Damned if I know, kemosabi. But when you're making those kind of calls, you're in the high country....

    --
    What were you expecting?
    1. Re:Wheelier wheel by Secret+Coward · · Score: 1
      What is it?

      Frankly, I don't know either, but here are my guesses:

      • Nano-technology
      • Robotic servents
      • Cheap, clean, limitless energy
    2. Re:Wheelier wheel by aiabx · · Score: 1

      how about a gyro-scooter?
      -aiabx

      --
      Just this guy, you know?
  30. What is your version of the Filthy Sanchez? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm asking because I know of 4 different kinds. How do you perform yours. har har har matey

  31. Re:What other famous woman programmers?!@! by andres32a · · Score: 3, Informative

    Most ENIAC progamers were women. Read this. You just might learn something.

  32. Re:dance on her grave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude.... who cares? This is about Better Holberton and her accomplishments, not about Java and MS. Please leave your /. obsessions at the door.

  33. That's not a REAL women BABY! Take off that mask by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And you'll find Bill Gates.

  34. Re:dance on her grave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    LOL... somehow I think that Ritchie, Stroustrup, Wall, or Gosling would sound more intelligent than you do. So let me guess... you invented Visual Basic? Bravo, my friend, you're a hero to the thousands of computer users who aren't intelligent enough to use PowerBuilder! It's really good for their self-esteem, too, telling them that they're "programmers" and all. Hell, you're probably single-handedly responsible for the creation of IT majors at hundreds of otherwise respectable universities around the world! Bravo!

    -- The_Messenger
    (also known as Mr. Flamebait)

  35. This woman rocked in many aspects... by haggar · · Score: 2, Funny

    First of all, she is one of the first programmers in the history of computing.
    Second, she is probably the programmer with the longest active career: she started before the war, and retired in 1983.
    Third, hey, she had a husband 33 years younger than her!

    I think she got a few things worth of envy, huh?

    --
    Sigged!
    1. Re:This woman rocked in many aspects... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Not sure if you were doing it on purpose to be funny...but "husband of 51 years" probably means that he has been her husband for the past 51 years. Not that he is 51 years old

    2. Re:This woman rocked in many aspects... by haggar · · Score: 1

      Let's just say that I did a purposeful misinterpretation :op

      --
      Sigged!
  36. Re:dance on her grave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even I, the one who hates LISP so much, would never say that about a person. She was obviously someone with a great amount of intelligence to work on a project like that. Normally I would say something about LISP being the cause of this, but I will show some respect because I know when to quit. Betty will in fact be missed.

  37. [OT] by devphil · · Score: 2


    Yeah, I remembered the "Rear" as I pressed "Submit," but I wasn't certain how much of a difference that makes to the official rank. I guess it's just like the subdivisions in a general's rank. (I haven't done as much work with the Navy as with the other branches.)

    She also won a Turing Award, didn't she? In '74 or '78?

    --
    You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
    1. Re:[OT] by Irvu · · Score: 1

      As I understand it the Rear makes a lot of difference. It's like the rank distinction between a General and Four Star General. Admirals as far as I understand command bases and carrier groups. Rear Admirals tell them what to do with those bases and carrier groups.

      She didn't actually win the Turing Award. They made the Grace Murray Hopper Award in 1971. On the whole I think I'd prefer having an award in my name too.

  38. Old time computing by os2fan · · Score: 4, Informative
    Before the computer revolution, computers were expensive and frail.

    My computer at college in 1981 was something nearing the end of its life. It was an 8086 with 4K of ram, and a paper tape drive. To boot it, you load up the tape, and load three values into ram (by a series of eight switches and a "set" switch), and then send a command 377 to the processor. This would jump it tot a location in memory, and then run the commands that you loaded there (effectively JMP address), which would then run the KEX program. KEX was a driver for a teletype. After that, you input through the keyboard by assembler code.

    Compared to that, mnenomics like a for add and b for bring would have been a godsend.

    Of fortran, basic and cobol. In the days of wire wound core, each bit of the byte made the machine more expensive, and there was some comprimise on the size of the bit. Fortran was designed to run on a six-bit machine. Even Knuth's MIX is underpowered by modern computers.

    BASIC is intended to run in small memory. MS made their packet by bumming it into 4K of ram, with a point and shoot interface.

    In effect, you moved a cursor around the FAT and entered on the file you wanted to run or edit, at least on the tandy 1000. Still, I built a RPN multibase hackable calculator in 6K of code.

    Where BASIC comes off the rails is that people start using it as a general programming language. Its inability to pass parameters to subroutines is easily overcome

    Thus var1 = fn3130{x, v, z} can be written as:

    A1=x:A2=v:A3=z:GOSUB 3130:var1=A1

    In fact, once the kernel is written and documented, you can turn a generic RPN calculator script into specific special purpose code. I had mine so that all variables in the calculator start with O, P and Q. The idea was that you could write messy code outside these letters, and use the calculator as an input device.

    And they say girls can't program. Ha. We just do it differently.

    --
    OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
    1. Re:Old time computing by Steve+Bergman · · Score: 1

      >It was an 8086 with 4K of ram,

      Hmmm. Sounds more like an 8080...

    2. Re:Old time computing by os2fan · · Score: 2

      It was years ago. Haven't seen the docos for 15 years. You may be right...

      --
      OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
    3. Re:Old time computing by Steve+Bergman · · Score: 1

      I started out, in high school, on an Altair 8080. It did not have the "front panel switches", but the model before it did. The machine booted from an 8 inch floppy and we had several teletypes. One was equipped with a tape reader which I used to back up my (rather simple) programs. We also had a DEC printing terminal. (MUCH faster than the teletypes!) And even a couple of CRT's which a friend of mine kicked up to 9600 baud one day and blew us all away! Ahhh. Those were the days!

    4. Re:Old time computing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Eight-inch floppies you say? I have a friend who recently had to throw out an eight-inch floppy drive belonging to his company's NEC Astra. The Astra was apparently used, eight-inch floppies and all, until 2000 to complete some monthly batch processing. He showed me some photos -- apparently all original hardware, keyboard, CRT and all. Quite interesting. (Funny, too. The CRT was off in the photo, but the startup screen text was burned so far in that you couldn't tell.) I would've loved to have bought the chassis off him, and turned it into some bookshelves or a fridge (a la VAXbar).

      Guess why they had to throw it away? Y2K problems, of course. ;-)

      No one can deny that old hardware rocks, but old hardware still in production use just fuckin' rules. These days, floppy drives are one of the least reliable standard components of a PC, but this floppy drive lasted decades of constant use. Wow.

      -- The_Messenger

    5. Re:Old time computing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Moved a cursor around the FAT?" I'm not calling bullshit here, but I'm calling brainfart- my Tandy 1000SX came with DOS 3.2 and Microsoft's Gee-Whiz BASIC, and I can safely say that, on any MS x86 BASIC, you were editing a program bufffer that could later be written with the SAVE command. Think about it- GWBASIC is a descendant of IBM Cassette BASIC is a descendant of Commodore BASIC 2.0 is a descendant of MS's initial BASIC for the Altair... and these machines didn't exactly let you swap to disk in the manner you suggest. :)

    6. Re:Old time computing by os2fan · · Score: 1
      Tandy 100, sorry, not tandy 1000.

      My mistake :(

      This was a laptop that supported a fat of 32 files, the interface was to move the highlight around the screen and select it.

      I never suggested that there was a disk involved. The files were saved and edited in RAM, as the tandy 100 did not have a hard disk.

      --
      OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
  39. Consider the FFT. by RobertFisher · · Score: 4, Informative
    I've heard Cooley & Tukey's original 1965 paper "An Algorithm for the Machine Calculation of Complex Fourier Series" on the FFT algorithm cited as such a vast improvement. (Indeed, it has been called "the most valuable numerical algorithm in our lifetime" by the applied mathematician Gilbert Strang.) When you consider it is an N log N algorithm, as opposed to previous N^2 methods (amounting to a factor of ~ 100 in computational efficiency for N ~ 1000, and even bigger gains for larger N), and just how often Fourier methods are used in all branches of computational science, you begin to appreciate how significant their achievement was.

    One should realize that the most fundamental numerical algorithms do not change very rapidly. The most common numerical algorithms (sorting, linear algebra, differential equations, etc., both in serial and parallel) have been the subject of intense research by an army of applied mathematicians over the last half-century. All you have to do to take advantage of that work is to call your friendly local numerical library.

    Of course, sophisticated 3D graphics methods are still the subject of intense research.

    So in sum, I would argue that as far as "serious" numerical methods go, excellent solutions usually exist. (These methods are "open source", indeed open source before the term existed! They are usually published in the scientific literature. The main gains that remain are in "entertainment" applications. Bob

    --
    Science, like Nature, must also be tamed, with a view turned towards its preservation.
  40. Re:women and computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hey, shut up.. I'm up to 125lb this week

  41. I find it amusing .... by os2fan · · Score: 3, Insightful
    that, when the mainframes ruled, that computing was associated with DATA (ie bits, bytes, fields and records), as in Automatic Data Processing, Datamation &c, but now that data is easy to come by, it's INFORMATION (eg Information Technology).

    I wonder how many IT people suggest technologies that are not computer-related: eg how many people suggest paper cards as a solution. I know I have.

    You see, once you start fiddling around with the hardware like Betty H did, you start using it wisely. It is one of the reasons that Unix works so well.

    --
    OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
    1. Re:I find it amusing .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hey, how many times are you going to post to this article?
      You
      must
      be
      bored!

      I guess that it's hard for a female geek to find much to do with her evenings. Why not reread your Ann Rice novels, or compose another awful poem about how men are insensitive brutes? Yeah, that's the ticket!

    2. Re:I find it amusing .... by os2fan · · Score: 1
      At least I have the courage to not hide behind the "Anomynous Coward" monicker.

      Still, of the four you quote, one bemoans the change of data and information. Another just agrees with what someone else's correction, a third is a hi to some troll, and the fourth is the story. This makes five.

      I can find a lot to do in the evenings, thank you. It's just morning over here: nearly lunch time, actually. And yes, I am currently bored, apart from passing on my experiences in the old times.

      I'd be more likely to while the hours away on Civ3 or REXX than read Ann Rice novels.

      --
      OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
    3. Re:I find it amusing .... by The+Diver · · Score: 1

      >> that, when the mainframes ruled

      Mainframes still rule.

    4. Re:I find it amusing .... by os2fan · · Score: 1
      When most people think of "computer", it's the desktop box, not some dinosaur in its air-conditioned pen with a side order of halon and a number of white-coats preening it. [Jargonfile quote] This is what I meant

      Now, with Beowulf clusters, Distributed computing, and IBM runing Linux in mainframe VM machines, one is seeing lots of little PCs competing on mainframe turf. PCs have largely displaced mainframe terminals. A pc running a 3270 emulator is cheaper than a 3270 terminal!

      --
      OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
  42. Re:dance on her grave by DavidJA · · Score: 1

    you invented Visual Basic?

    Actualy, the guy that invented visual basic. Happens to be one of the richest men in the world.

    Visual Basic is used by thousands of organisations around the world use it, and thousands of programmers make a lot of money by providing real world solutions, written in visual basic to real world problems.

    There are many computing/business problems out there that C/C++/Linux is simply overkill.

    I'm glad that your ability to program in c/c++/whatever gives you a high self-esteem, but why don't you take your illusions of grandure and shove them up your ass.

    Your give the /. and linux community a bad name.

    BTW - No, I'm not a vb programmer.

  43. Re:What other famous woman programmers?!@! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    relax, dude - this article just shows that the population of women programmers just got cut in half.

  44. Like OS/2 - yes!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    OS/2 was the OS of choice before the Linux revolution. Most people who used OS/2 did so by choice: actually had to buy and install.

    The first PC grass root movement was for OS/2, and a lot of useful things were learnt from this (and the mistakes made).

    That IBM "abandoned" OS/2 and the rise of Linux had allowed many OS/2ers to go over to linux. Many freely admit to it.

    Some of us stayed, largely because Linux is an entirely different paradigm to the OS/2 - Windows - DOS world we live in. But at least I am doing something by supporting an alternate to Windows.

    1. Re:Like OS/2 - yes!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blah, blah blah.

      Sorry dude, but OS/2 just plainly SUCKS, as it did in the past...

  45. Re:dance on her grave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    YHBT. YHL. HAND!

    If you enjoyed this troll, you many also enjoy my other work from this article:

    ...and, of course... Yeah, and I'm really sorry for "giving the /. and linux community a bad name." I wouldn't want to ruin Slashdot's reputation as the home for hypocritical Microsoft bashing and gay porn.

    HTH!

    -- The_Messenger

  46. Re:More Revisionist History by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i think i'm in love!

  47. Re:What other famous woman programmers?!@! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Most ENIAC progamers were women.

    Of course they were. Practically everyone in the civilian workforce were women. Men were supposed to be overseas getting their arms and legs blown off.

  48. At least by os2fan · · Score: 2
    At least the OS/2 user that you trolled has written computer languages.

    In OS/2 it is easy to do that. This is because of EXTPROC and REXX. From that, you can write a REXX script for the processor, and feed the language script in as data. Saved many hundreds of hours' work doing it like that.

    Maybe you can do that in Linux too - don't know enough about that.

    Most good authorities on computer languages says you should learn several languages. This allows you to think more creatively. I know.

    --
    OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
    1. Re:At least by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Okay, I'll be serious for a minute... I use a combination of various Microsoft systems (NT4, NT5), UNIX systems (Solaris and AIX) and UNIX-wannabes (GNU/Linux), but I've never used OS/2. From what I've read about it, I can say that it appeals to me, but unfortunately with its poor software and hardware support, I really can't find a decent excuse to play with it. And while I prefer C-family languages, I've used several REXX-derivatives (mostly as internal macro languages with text editors, much like GNU EMACS uses ELisp), and it's pretty cool. In fact it's cool enough that earlier this year I considered buying a copy of PC-DOS to play with. (And I can actually justify that, because DOS is a requirement for many things in PC land, notably BIOS flashes. ;-)

      And you are correct about learning multiple languages. A programmer who only knows one language probably isn't someone who I want to talk to at length. The fact that the modern world allows people to narrow themselves to one language (i.e. "java programmer" and "vb programmer" as opposed to "computer programmer") is sort of sad, but that's a sign of the times we live in -- times in which a person can become a "programmer" with an IT certificate, and times in which such a small percentage of the computer industry is actualy geeks.

      Oh, and as far as your Linux question, most Linux people tend to prefer Perl when doing work helped by the "language as data" paradigm. Another biggie would probably be Lisp, but Perl definitely reigns supreme. (Amazing how useful Perl is. I joke about Perl a lot, but I haven't written a Bourne script in years.)

      You may be aware that even humble JavaScripts can use themselves as data, thanks to the simple eval() method. IMHO JavaScript was never developed to its full potential, and with the slow demise of Netscape/iPlanet HTTP servers and server-side JavaScript, I doubt that it will ever be pursued further. JavaScript is tech that everyone uses but no one wants to be associated with -- even Microsoft's particular ECMAscript hack, JScript, has fallen by thw wayside, despite being faster and more efficient that the hellish VBScript that MS uses everywhere. Sad. As someone who prefers C-family languages (C/C++/ObjC/Java), I'll always remember JScript as the language that allowed by to survive several MS/web-related projects with my sanity intact.

      (Okay, now we're really getting offtopic, but if you ever find yourself in COM-land, check out Microsoft's Windows Scripting Objects. Essentially it's a tech that allows you to use JScript and VBScript objects as full-fledged COM objects. You download a tool that generates the appropriate XML descriptor and even grabs and registers a GUID for you. Now you can use script objects anywhere you can use registered COM components, including ASP. Yep, you guessed it -- JScript WSOs and ASP could be the successor to Netscape's bastard SSJS. :-)

      Regardless, IBM is developing some interested JavaScript-enabled tech. If it enters the mainstream, I may have to swallow my pride and develop my next AI project in JavaScript, if only because of the ubiquity of the platform.

      Where was I? Oh yes, me being a troll...stop feeding the trolls! ;-)

      -- The_Messenger
      http://www.geocities.com/trolltuesday2k1

    2. Re:At least by os2fan · · Score: 1
      You will find the PC/DOS thing really good. Most of its utilities have been defanged, so they run under many different DOS environments. In the fix pack, for DOS 70, you can make its true version appear to be 6.30: handy if you want to run QEMM.

      But if all you are after is REXX, it's better to check out Quercus REXX as their rexx multi-tasks better. It also is available as a Windows version, where you can experiment with the bugs of the Windows command line: eg passing parameters to a script, eg "REXX frog a b" does not work.

      OS/2 is strong where Windows is weak, and weak where Windows is strong. It's an interesting contrast. The OS/2 community, like the Linux community, attract people who want to be there, and the latest version out this year is not dissimilar to a Linux distro for what you get (except the price tag is higher). The next version is supporting a VMWare-like project that runs Windows and Linux in a virtual computer.

      The trouble that I find with MS scripting languages is that they're unusually hard and restrictive. VBA for example, makes Excel calls by a rather lengthy call, and it's not much use for the causal programer (compared to say, 1-2-3's menu-keystroke command. [Yes, I used both].

      So while I try to avoid MS stuff, just seeing how the other guys do it is an eyeopener. You would know yourself, that from your unix/linux experience, you make Windows work harder, and from your Windows experience, you make Linux work harder.

      --
      OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
  49. info: good by bettie by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    see ya in programmer's heaven...

  50. More like microcode by localroger · · Score: 2
    Very early computers like ENIAC were essentially programmed in microcode, so each element of what today would be the ALU could be used simultaneously with all the others. This isn't "multitasking" in the way we think of it today so much as hand-tuned "pipelining."

    Similar tricks were used in machines that had drum and delay-line memories, arranging the instructions such that the next one needed would emerge from the magnetic head or piezo reader just as the previous one was finished executing ... often with other instructions belonging to a different "thread" filling the gaps.

    In those days you programmed to the bare metal because it was the only way to get anything useful done.

    --
    Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
  51. Just a correction by GreggBert · · Score: 1

    Alan Cooper is widely known as the "Father or Visual Basic", not bill. He (Alan) also wrote a pretty kick ass (for the time) book on usability called "About Face". It's still worth a read today IMHO.

    --


    If you don't understand anything I post, please accept that I ate paste as a small boy...
  52. it gets better by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 1

    January 2002 Dr. Dobbs Journal, page 18: basically some unidentifiable chick could have figured out the secret of the enigma machine much earlier than everyone else, but she wasn't allowed to follow up on her insights. She's called Mrs. BB because they can't think of anything better.

    --
    [o]_O
  53. Sure Linux can do that. by Bishop · · Score: 2

    Of course you can do that under linux. IBM Object REXX for Linux or other REXX for Unix.

    1. Re:Sure Linux can do that. by os2fan · · Score: 1
      I was thinking more in line with the /# command in the shell script: this passes the rest off to some other command, I think.

      EXTPROC works like this. Suppose you have a batch ADD.CMD that goes like this:

      EXTPROC RPN
      b %1
      b %2
      a
      s

      The command ADD 1 2 would execute the command RPN ADD 1 2, which would read each line of ADD.CMD through RPN, and give the result of 5.

      That's how I read it.

      Whether you let REXX or CEnvi or Perl process the RPN script is a mute point. What I was getting at was that you could create commands for different processors, AND be heard correctly.

      For recollection, Linux shells do support it. And yes, I have object and regina rexx for Win/OS2/Linux :)

      --
      OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
  54. Right down the hall by r3volve · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm typing this from a Penn CSE lab which is right down the hall from the room housing some of the remnants of ENIAC. There is a large picture on the wall, in which Betty is featured prominently, and she's been mentioned in almost every undergrad CSE class I've taken here so far.. it's nice to know that her efforts won't go un-noticed by kids like me these days, who grew up in the PC (non-mainframe) age.

  55. what exactly are you smoking? by nomadic · · Score: 2

    While her accomplishments may seem minor compared to those of the modern-day programmers,

    Actually her accomplishments seem a hell of a lot more important than those of any contemporary programmers. I know slashdotters tend to have messianic complexes, but come on, show some humility; she represents the generation that created the computer revolution.

    1. Re:what exactly are you smoking? by The+Great+Wakka · · Score: 1

      I wasn't talking about me! I was talking about people who actually work as programmers.

      --
      Everything is mainstream now.
    2. Re:what exactly are you smoking? by nomadic · · Score: 1

      I can think of a handful of people who have been that important in computer science. And none of them post on slashdot. And none of them are involved with Linux.

  56. Re:women and computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROFLMAO,

    The best by far, whoever wrote that is a legendary
    troller, witty and very, very creative.

    salut

  57. Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I found this on Google. It attributes the quote to Andy Rooney.

  58. good book by cyberbob2010 · · Score: 1

    I'm readinga good book rigt now about te attempt at the first computer called, "The difference Engine". It'd b Charles Babbage and is prett good.

    --
    We seldom regret saying too little but often regret saying too much.
  59. Re:dance on her grave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was replying to the parent post, not the article. Yes, I suppose I should have marked the thing [OT], but one would think that that'd be easily inferred from the fact that I was replying to a 0 comment from an AC...

  60. [OT]Re:Sure Linux can do that. by Bishop · · Score: 2

    In general you can do this under *nix with #!at the top of the file. So if you had a *nix command /usr/bin/rpn your example would translate into:

    #!/usr/bin/rpn
    b %1
    b %2
    a
    s

    Just about every *nix command that accepts a file containing commands as an argument will work this way.


    I never did like REXX back when I was using OS/2 and I don't know why. It looks like REXX is an easy language to program with. And really I should have jumped at the chance to use a "real" scripting language versus basic and those hideous dos batch files.

  61. Re:women and computers by Phyle · · Score: 1

    All the programmers working at Bletchley park in the second world war were women; partly because all the men were in the army, but mostly because programming Colossus was a lot like working a telephone switchboard.

    With the secrecy that surrounded Bletchley Park after the war, these women represent the best surviving knowledge of Collosus' operation (except for the blueprints and notes Turing kindly sent Von Neumann...)

  62. Go Betty! by spector30 · · Score: 1

    I never heard of "Betty" before today. Having read her obituary I can only think to say thanks for all that she has left of us with that was uniquely her. How many of us will be able to look back at our lives and say we have contributed as much?

    --
    If Darwin was right, you'd be dead by now.
  63. Women's lib by Wesley+Everest · · Score: 1
    The reason the first programmers on the ENIAC were women was that most of the men had gone off to fight WWII. The interesting thing, though, is that all the government propaganda aimed at women in the 40's influenced how mothers raised their daughters -- even if women weren't treated equally, women on a large scale came to believe that they *should* be treated equally. So even though the powers that be put women "back in their place", their daughters grew up with some ideas. That's at least part of what led to the women's lib movement in the late 60's and 70's.

    Unfortunately, it kind of hit a dead-end with many unresolved issues. Now, a great many more women work full-time jobs, but so do men. In fact, the average work-week has grown steady up from 40 hours to 45 or 50. Meanwhile it has grown more and more difficult to financially support a family on one income, but the housework still needs doing and kids need taking care of.

    It's true that women tend to make less for the same work as men, but even if that gets equalized, that doesn't solve the bigger problems. Being forced to work 50+ hours a week is hardly "liberation," and certainly not what the feminist movement was hoping to achieve.

    Ultimately, both men and women need to work together to liberate ourselves (at least those of us in the bottom 99% economically).

  64. REXX by os2fan · · Score: 1
    Rexx is very powerful when it comes to reading and creating strings. It has a huge calculator in it [ie bignum], and you can do things like edit files in it. On the other hand, it is slow.

    What makes it useful is that you can write a filter or batch processor quickly.

    As far as batch processors go, you can write one that has just one command, eg "$#$". Anything that follows $#$ is processed as a sub command, and anything else just passes through unprocessed. You can then use this to produce RTF output (since most lines are unprocessed, and only the values to be substituted get processed).

    You can do the same in PERL, but in the DOS/Win/OS/2 world, REXX is the most widely known.

    --
    OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.