Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!floyd!harpo!decvax!minow
From: minow@decvax.UUCP (Martin Minow)
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: Professional Programmers and Terminal Jockeys
Message-ID: <4@decvax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 29-May-84 22:48:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: decvax.4
Posted: Tue May 29 22:48:37 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 1-Jun-84 07:26:38 EDT
References: <436@erix.UUCP>
Organization: DEC UNIX Engineering Group
Lines: 33

Along with a few other people on this network, my programming
experience reaches back into the dim, distant past:  I wrote
more-or-less raw machine code for Illiac I, SPS and Autocoder
for the IBM 1401, punched many boxes of cards in Fortran II,
Mad, and assembler for the IBM 7090, wrote Algol on papertape
for Trask (a Swedish transistorized descendent of Illiac I),
punched more boxes of cards for an IBM 360, and have been using
minicomputers and timesharing systems for about 12 years now.

I prefer the flexibility and speed of composition of today's
interactive environment.  Joss and Basic (both about 20 years
old now) are the two single greatest advances in computer
engineering since Grace Hopper invented Cobol and Don Wheeler
invented the subroutine call.

A friend recently mentioned that he read a study comparing
programming environments.  They concluded that the most
cost-effective environment was interactive Basic.  This is
in full aggreement with my experiences.

One of the problems with proffesorial decrees on the theories
of software engineering is that none of them have ever written
a "real-world" program, such as a payroll or warehouse receiving
system.  Turns out that the real world isn't quite as well
organized as one would like, and tools honed by the task of
moving queens around on a chessboard aren't always suitable
for the task of deciding where to put the 25 tons of steel rod
that just arrived at the loading dock.

Martin Minow
decvax!minow