Subject:
|
Re: Case-sensitivity in programming languages
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.publish
|
Date:
|
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 17:31:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1723 times
|
| |
|
|
On Fri, 19 Feb 1999 01:12:46 GMT, "Earls HouseHold"
<brandone@mounet.com> wrote:
> This is true, Steve, but even COBOL used all caps on the 80 column cards.
True. It just wasted more bytes with long source code than it saved
with a small character set.
Then again, when it really mattered, the source code was prolly kept in
card decks, and only the compiled code ever made it to magnetic storage.
> Most of the early keypunch machines had only caps. Did you ever wonder why
> the standard VDT line length was 80 characters back before someone decided
> that it would be nice to use all the paper space on a 14 X 11 fan fold
> sheet? It started with them cards.
I hadn't thought of that. Makes sense.
> I can still remember having to program
> I/O with patch board and hardwire. Does that make me a geezer?
I suppose it does, you geezer. ;)
I remember that my dad always wrote in a very neat, 'printed', all-caps
hand. I realize now that came from him spending so much time writing
down programs for keypunch operators to transcribe.
> What it
> boils down to is "you like what you like and you usually like what you use
> the most".
Very true.
Steve
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Case-sensitivity in programming languages
|
| Steve Bliss wrote in message <36cc20bc.5396372@lu...et.com>... (...) This is true, Steve, but even COBOL used all caps on the 80 column cards. Most of the early keypunch machines had only caps. Did you ever wonder why the standard VDT line length (...) (25 years ago, 19-Feb-99, to lugnet.publish)
|
58 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
