I was just wondering does anyone know how old Lisp is? It seems like it a
very old programming language to me as I cannot find much about it
anywhere like in a library (only really old books) or on the net.
Thanx.
"kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
> I was just wondering does anyone know how old Lisp is? It seems like it a
> very old programming language to me as I cannot find much about it
> anywhere like in a library (only really old books) or on the net.
>
> Thanx.
http://www.lisp.org/table/history.htm
"kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
> I was just wondering does anyone know how old Lisp is? It seems like it a
> very old programming language to me as I cannot find much about it
> anywhere like in a library (only really old books) or on the net.
Try www.cliki.net. There is a section (Documents) whith lots of modern
resources.
Mario S. Mommer <········@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<··············@germany.igpm.rwth-aachen.de>...
> "kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
> > I was just wondering does anyone know how old Lisp is? It seems like it a
> > very old programming language to me as I cannot find much about it
> > anywhere like in a library (only really old books) or on the net.
>
> Try www.cliki.net. There is a section (Documents) whith lots of modern
> resources.
Lisp was first defined by John McCarthy in 1960, however, I guess he
had the language from 1958, so that makes Lisp 46 years old.
--
Certum quod factum.
Philip Haddad
"kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> wrote in message news:<································@localhost.talkaboutprogramming.com>...
> I was just wondering does anyone know how old Lisp is?
What do you mean by Lisp? There is no language that is Lisp; it refers
to a family of languages that share certain superficial
characteristics.
Your question is like asking, how old is that language which uses
curly brackets for block scope, ++ for incrementing variables and has
a type called int?
Well, which one do you mean? Java? C++? Objective C? ANSI C? K&R C?
Some tiny scripting language based on C?
"kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
> Sheesh...some of you people need a break from programming i can tell..it
> was just a general question. Go meditate or something.
It's a question that can't be answered. Your question shows that you
haven't yet looked at Lisp to know what it is. Who knows why you're
asking how old it is when you don't even know what you're referring
to...
--
Rahul Jain
·····@nyct.net
Professional Software Developer, Amateur Quantum Mechanicist
In article <··············@nyct.net>, Rahul Jain <·····@nyct.net>
wrote:
> "kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
>
> > Sheesh...some of you people need a break from programming i can tell..it
> > was just a general question. Go meditate or something.
>
> It's a question that can't be answered. Your question shows that you
> haven't yet looked at Lisp to know what it is. Who knows why you're
> asking how old it is when you don't even know what you're referring
> to...
Wow. not one but three Yobbos see fit to attack kazz because you do not
like his question, or the fact that he takes exception to gratuitous
abuse. Tsk, tsk.
Would it not be easier to answer the question?
Answer: " My desire for an algebraic list processing language for
artificial intelligence work on the IBM 704 computer arose in the summer
of 1956" -- John McCarthy
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/lisp/node2.html#SECTION0002000
0000000000000
kenny
Kenneth Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> Would it not be easier to answer the question?
>
> Answer: " My desire for an algebraic list processing language for
> artificial intelligence work on the IBM 704 computer arose in the summer
> of 1956" -- John McCarthy
How do you know he means the Lisp of 1956 and not the Common Lisp of
1984? I would assume he wouldn't be using the Lisp of 1956, so 20 years
old would be a more accurate answer.
--
Rahul Jain
·····@nyct.net
Professional Software Developer, Amateur Quantum Mechanicist
Rahul Jain <·····@nyct.net> wrote in message news:<··············@nyct.net>...
> How do you know he means the Lisp of 1956 and not the Common Lisp of
> 1984? I would assume he wouldn't be using the Lisp of 1956, so 20 years
> old would be a more accurate answer.
[quizzical look] The edition of the Iliad on my shelf is copyright in
the late 1990s. But if someone asks how many years old the Iliad is,
they don't want to hear "under 10".
···············@yahoo.com (Mark McConnell) writes:
> Rahul Jain <·····@nyct.net> wrote in message news:<··············@nyct.net>...
>> How do you know he means the Lisp of 1956 and not the Common Lisp of
>> 1984? I would assume he wouldn't be using the Lisp of 1956, so 20 years
>> old would be a more accurate answer.
>
> [quizzical look] The edition of the Iliad on my shelf is copyright in
> the late 1990s. But if someone asks how many years old the Iliad is,
> they don't want to hear "under 10".
In that case, you don't know what Lisp was in the 1960s or 70s, because
that comparison is completely and utterly bogus. CL isn't even a
translation of LISP 1.5 into some other language...
--
Rahul Jain
·····@nyct.net
Professional Software Developer, Amateur Quantum Mechanicist
Rahul Jain wrote:
> Kenneth Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
>
>
>>Would it not be easier to answer the question?
>>
>>Answer: " My desire for an algebraic list processing language for
>>artificial intelligence work on the IBM 704 computer arose in the summer
>>of 1956" -- John McCarthy
>
>
> How do you know he means the Lisp of 1956 and not the Common Lisp of
> 1984? I would assume he wouldn't be using the Lisp of 1956, so 20 years
> old would be a more accurate answer.
>
See? That wasn't so hard, was it?
:)
kt
--
Cells? Cello? Celtik?: http://www.common-lisp.net/project/cells/
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> Rahul Jain wrote:
>
>> How do you know he means the Lisp of 1956 and not the Common Lisp of
>> 1984? I would assume he wouldn't be using the Lisp of 1956, so 20 years
>> old would be a more accurate answer.
>>
>
> See? That wasn't so hard, was it?
Random assumptions are never hard to make.
--
Rahul Jain
·····@nyct.net
Professional Software Developer, Amateur Quantum Mechanicist
Kenneth Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> In article <··············@nyct.net>, Rahul Jain <·····@nyct.net>
> wrote:
>
> > "kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
> >
> > > Sheesh...some of you people need a break from programming i can tell..it
> > > was just a general question. Go meditate or something.
> >
> > It's a question that can't be answered. Your question shows that you
> > haven't yet looked at Lisp to know what it is. Who knows why you're
> > asking how old it is when you don't even know what you're referring
> > to...
>
> Wow. not one but three Yobbos see fit to attack kazz because you do not
> like his question, or the fact that he takes exception to gratuitous
> abuse. Tsk, tsk.
>
> Would it not be easier to answer the question?
Some of us don't think that it would be helpful to answer his question.
Christopher C. Stacy wrote:
> Kenneth Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
>
>
>>In article <··············@nyct.net>, Rahul Jain <·····@nyct.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Sheesh...some of you people need a break from programming i can tell..it
>>>>was just a general question. Go meditate or something.
>>>
>>>It's a question that can't be answered. Your question shows that you
>>>haven't yet looked at Lisp to know what it is. Who knows why you're
>>>asking how old it is when you don't even know what you're referring
>>>to...
>>
>>Wow. not one but three Yobbos see fit to attack kazz because you do not
>>like his question, or the fact that he takes exception to gratuitous
>>abuse. Tsk, tsk.
>>
>>Would it not be easier to answer the question?
>
>
> Some of us don't think that it would be helpful to answer his question.
>
Then silence would have been golden. Why respond at all?
kt
--
Cells? Cello? Celtik?: http://www.common-lisp.net/project/cells/
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> Christopher C. Stacy wrote:
>
> > Kenneth Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> >
> >> In article <··············@nyct.net>, Rahul Jain <·····@nyct.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Sheesh...some of you people need a break from programming i can tell..it
> >>>> was just a general question. Go meditate or something.
> >>>
> >>>It's a question that can't be answered. Your question shows that you
> >>>haven't yet looked at Lisp to know what it is. Who knows why you're
> >>>asking how old it is when you don't even know what you're referring
> >>>to...
> >>
> >> Wow. not one but three Yobbos see fit to attack kazz because you do
> >> not like his question, or the fact that he takes exception to
> >> gratuitous abuse. Tsk, tsk.
> >>
> >>Would it not be easier to answer the question?
> > Some of us don't think that it would be helpful to answer his
> > question.
> >
>
> Then silence would have been golden. Why respond at all?
To decrease the noise level by discouraging similar people
in the future who might happen to read it. (Not a perfect
solution, but it's what I felt was the best use of my time.)
In article <·············@news.dtpq.com>,
······@news.dtpq.com (Christopher C. Stacy) wrote:
> Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
>
> > Christopher C. Stacy wrote:
> >
> > > Kenneth Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> > >
> > >> In article <··············@nyct.net>, Rahul Jain <·····@nyct.net>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>"kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>Sheesh...some of you people need a break from programming i can tell..it
> > >>>> was just a general question. Go meditate or something.
> > >>>
> > >>>It's a question that can't be answered. Your question shows that you
> > >>>haven't yet looked at Lisp to know what it is. Who knows why you're
> > >>>asking how old it is when you don't even know what you're referring
> > >>>to...
> > >>
> > >> Wow. not one but three Yobbos see fit to attack kazz because you do
> > >> not like his question, or the fact that he takes exception to
> > >> gratuitous abuse. Tsk, tsk.
> > >>
> > >>Would it not be easier to answer the question?
> > > Some of us don't think that it would be helpful to answer his
> > > question.
> > >
> >
> > Then silence would have been golden. Why respond at all?
>
> To decrease the noise level by discouraging similar people
> in the future who might happen to read it.
Would not a friendly "Dude! Google!! Specifically 'lisp history'" have
better achieved that and avoided the offense to kazz and consequent
pissing contest?
kenny
Kenneth Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> In article <·············@news.dtpq.com>,
> ······@news.dtpq.com (Christopher C. Stacy) wrote:
>
> > Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> >
> > > Christopher C. Stacy wrote:
> > >
> > > > Kenneth Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> > > >
> > > >> In article <··············@nyct.net>, Rahul Jain <·····@nyct.net>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>>"kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>Sheesh...some of you people need a break from programming i can tell..it
> > > >>>> was just a general question. Go meditate or something.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>It's a question that can't be answered. Your question shows that you
> > > >>>haven't yet looked at Lisp to know what it is. Who knows why you're
> > > >>>asking how old it is when you don't even know what you're referring
> > > >>>to...
> > > >>
> > > >> Wow. not one but three Yobbos see fit to attack kazz because you do
> > > >> not like his question, or the fact that he takes exception to
> > > >> gratuitous abuse. Tsk, tsk.
> > > >>
> > > >>Would it not be easier to answer the question?
> > > > Some of us don't think that it would be helpful to answer his
> > > > question.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Then silence would have been golden. Why respond at all?
> >
> > To decrease the noise level by discouraging similar people
> > in the future who might happen to read it.
>
> Would not a friendly "Dude! Google!! Specifically 'lisp history'" have
> better achieved that and avoided the offense to kazz and consequent
> pissing contest?
I think my approach got the results that I intended (which did not
include being friendly).
Kenneth Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> Would it not be easier to answer the question?
Would it?
-dan
--
"please make sure that the person is your friend before you confirm"
kazzarazza003 wrote:
> I was just wondering does anyone know how old Lisp is? It seems like
> it a very old programming language to me as I cannot find much about
> it anywhere like in a library (only really old books) or on the net.
>
> Thanx.
It's pretty old, kindof: These days its important to note that
it's changed considerably since it first appeared on the scene
(just as C has, or english!). You have to be careful when
dealing with non-lisp people's opinions on lisp: many of them
equate lisp with the-lisp-of-1970-something, and will still trot out
silliness like "LISP is slow because its interpreted" or
"LISP's only data structure is the list".
[The usage of "LISP" (all caps) tends to be a giveaway, as most people
in the Lisp community have long stopped capitalising it, though that's
not an absolute rule at all.]
On 2004-10-23 16:09:42, Stefan Ram wrote:
> You can't even refer to "C90" or "C99" or so, because
> - strictly - the correct name of the language being specified
> by ISO/IEC 9899:1999 (E) is not "C99" or anything else, but
> it is "C".
Thank Yoda for Ada 95. :-)
A 1909 year old language ...
It is of course old, but not enough to actually require us to use a
....bignum yet in order to describe it....
:-)
Panos C. Lekkas
"Stefan Scholl" <······@no-spoon.de> wrote in message
·····················@parsec.no-spoon.de...
> On 2004-10-23 16:09:42, Stefan Ram wrote:
>
> > You can't even refer to "C90" or "C99" or so, because
> > - strictly - the correct name of the language being specified
> > by ISO/IEC 9899:1999 (E) is not "C99" or anything else, but
> > it is "C".
>
> Thank Yoda for Ada 95. :-)
>
> A 1909 year old language ...
"xstream" <·······@attglobal.net> writes:
> It is of course old, but not enough to actually require us to use a
> ....bignum yet in order to describe it....
It depends in what unit and on what implementation.
LISP is about 1451649600 seconds old.
In clisp-2.33.2 on ix86:
(type-of (* (- 2004 1958) 36525/100 24 60 60)) ==> (integer (16777215))
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/lisp/node2.html
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/lisp/node3.html
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
Voting Democrat or Republican is like choosing a cabin in the Titanic.
David Golden <············@oceanfree.net> writes:
> You have to be careful when
> dealing with non-lisp people's opinions on lisp: many of them
> equate lisp with the-lisp-of-1970-something, and will still trot out
> silliness like "LISP is slow because its interpreted"
This wasn't even true back then.
--
Rahul Jain
·····@nyct.net
Professional Software Developer, Amateur Quantum Mechanicist
Rahul Jain wrote:
> David Golden <············@oceanfree.net> writes:
>
>> You have to be careful when
>> dealing with non-lisp people's opinions on lisp: many of them
>> equate lisp with the-lisp-of-1970-something, and will still trot out
>> silliness like "LISP is slow because its interpreted"
>
> This wasn't even true back then.
>
Fair enough. I wasn't conceived until 1978, my memories of the
time are not particularly accurate :-)
I think even back then, the perception of lisp might have slipped
behind the state of the art - in G.E.B. (1979), Hofstadter presents
LISP as exclusively interpreted* and in fact talks a little about how
it's different to incremental (he says "line-by-line") compilation of
stuff entered at the REPL (that many modern lisps actually do!).
In fact, compiled lisp probably appeared at least as early as the
1965-1970 period, if my just-googled understanding of the lisp machine
timeline is correct.
Actually, given that many people's first encounter of lisp might still
be via G.E.B., I would pinpoint G.E.B. as a likely source
for many of the misconceptions many people still have of lisp.
* Levels of Description, and Computer Systems: "Higher-Level Languages,
Compilers and Interpreters", p292 of my copy.
David Golden <············@oceanfree.net> writes:
> In fact, compiled lisp probably appeared at least as early as the
> 1965-1970 period, if my just-googled understanding of the lisp machine
> timeline is correct.
Indeed, McCarthy wrote a memo on the lisp compiler even BEFORE he
wrote his fundamental memo on lisp, AIM-8! It's AIM-7, before March
4, 1959.
http://www.ai.mit.edu/research/publications/browse/0000browse.shtml
We will start with a very modest compiler. Our first major goal is
a compiler that will compile recursive function definitions. Its
input will be LISP statements in restricted notation and its
output will be a SAP tape. However we will start with an even
simpler compiler that will only compile programs to evaluate
expressions and at first we will print rather than punch them.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
Voting Democrat or Republican is like choosing a cabin in the Titanic.
"kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
> I was just wondering does anyone know how old Lisp is?
No, nobody knows.
> It seems like it a very old programming language to me as I
> cannot find much about it anywhere like in a library (only
> really old books) or on the net.
Is that Internet thing still around?
"kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> wrote in message news:<································@localhost.talkaboutprogramming.com>...
> I am new to lisp...don't mock me, that is insulting and rude.
We're known to have very dry humor around here. BTW, Lisp does need to
come with a warning "Warning: Extremely Addictive", because when you
really start to use it, you can't stop.
I believe I answered your question about how old Lisp is, but just for
fun, here is McCarthy's orignial paper on it:
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/recursive.pdf
I assume you have a pdf viewer :P
--
Certum quod factum.
Philip Haddad
·············@gmail.com (Philip Haddad) writes:
> "kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> wrote in message news:<································@localhost.talkaboutprogramming.com>...
> > I am new to lisp...don't mock me, that is insulting and rude.
>
> We're known to have very dry humor around here. BTW, Lisp does need to
> come with a warning "Warning: Extremely Addictive", because when you
> really start to use it, you can't stop.
> I believe I answered your question about how old Lisp is, but just for
> fun, here is McCarthy's orignial paper on it:
> http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/recursive.pdf
>
> I assume you have a pdf viewer :P
I'd rather call AIM-8 dated March 4, 1959 as the original one.
http://www.ai.mit.edu/research/publications/browse/0000browse.shtml
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
Voting Democrat or Republican is like choosing a cabin in the Titanic.
kazzarazza003 wrote:
> I am new to lisp...don't mock me, that is insulting and rude.
And you're hypersensitive and annoying. I think we'd all be better
off it you just went away, ok?
Paul
"Paul F. Dietz" <·····@dls.net> wrote in message news:<······················@dls.net>...
> kazzarazza003 wrote:
>
> > I am new to lisp...don't mock me, that is insulting and rude.
>
> And you're hypersensitive and annoying. I think we'd all be better
> off it you just went away, ok?
>
> Paul
I think we succeeded in chasing him away.
--
Certum quod factum.
Philip Haddad
"kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
> I am new to lisp...don't mock me, that is insulting and rude.
Just a bit of advice: Ignore the posts that seem insulting to
you. Otherwise you are in for a beating you will remember for quite
some time (this holds not only for comp.lang.lisp). Don't bark with
the dogs; it is pointless.
"kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
> I am new to lisp...don't mock me, that is insulting and rude.
I'm not mocking you because you are new to Lisp. I am mocking
you because you don't know how, or perhaps are too lazy, to look
up anything on the web. Entering "common lisp history", for example,
returns 88,500 hits, at least the first page of which is full of links
to the answer to your question.
I think you are wasting our time, which I find rude and insulting.
Do you do this because you are lazy, or because you are stupid?
On 2004-10-24 12:30:14 -0400, ······@news.dtpq.com (Christopher C. Stacy) said:
> "kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
>> I am new to lisp...don't mock me, that is insulting and rude.
>
> I'm not mocking you because you are new to Lisp. I am mocking you
> because you don't know how, or perhaps are too lazy, to look up
> anything on the web. Entering "common lisp history", for example,
> returns 88,500 hits, at least the first page of which is full of links
> to the answer to your question.
>
> I think you are wasting our time, which I find rude and insulting.
> Do you do this because you are lazy, or because you are stupid?
My Yobbo Detector just went off. :) Yes, kazz could use some help with
his googling.
kt
"kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
> I am new to lisp...don't mock me, that is insulting and rude.
>
The thin-skinned don't last long in this group. Here's a
representative quotation from an old Lisp user who will remain
anonymous unless he specifically requests to be named:
I can see you're going to do just *fine* here in comp.lang.lisp.
I'm rather looking forward to the ritual disembowelling, in
particular, although the bit were we chop your arms and legs off
and feed them to crocodiles is also good.
Consider yourself lucky that so far you've only been lightly singed.
We're a dangerous lot, with only the likes of Kenny Tilton to keep us
from cutting a bloody swath through the crowds of newbies standing
around with bewildered looks on their faces.
Though I admit we haven't got the firepower of the Scheme crowd.
--
Fred Gilham ······@csl.sri.com
"Don't fight it son, confess quickly. If you hold out too long, you
could jeopardize your credit rating."
-- Torture scene from the movie "Brazil"
Fred Gilham <······@snapdragon.csl.sri.com> writes:
> "kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
>
> > I am new to lisp...don't mock me, that is insulting and rude.
> >
>
> The thin-skinned don't last long in this group. Here's a
> representative quotation from an old Lisp user who will remain
> anonymous unless he specifically requests to be named:
>
> I can see you're going to do just *fine* here in comp.lang.lisp.
> I'm rather looking forward to the ritual disembowelling, in
> particular, although the bit were we chop your arms and legs off
> and feed them to crocodiles is also good.
>
> Consider yourself lucky that so far you've only been lightly singed.
> We're a dangerous lot, with only the likes of Kenny Tilton to keep us
> from cutting a bloody swath through the crowds of newbies standing
> around with bewildered looks on their faces.
>
> Though I admit we haven't got the firepower of the Scheme crowd.
Nah, you haven't been bitched out until you go onto an hvac-related
newsgroup and ask about installing your own central AC system.
They're a pretty tough crowd...
Gregm
Fred Gilham wrote:
> "kazzarazza003" <········@students.unisa.edu.au> writes:
>
>
>>I am new to lisp...don't mock me, that is insulting and rude.
>>
>
>
> The thin-skinned don't last long in this group. Here's a
> representative quotation from an old Lisp user who will remain
> anonymous unless he specifically requests to be named:
>
> I can see you're going to do just *fine* here in comp.lang.lisp.
> I'm rather looking forward to the ritual disembowelling, in
> particular, although the bit were we chop your arms and legs off
> and feed them to crocodiles is also good.
>
> Consider yourself lucky that so far you've only been lightly singed.
> We're a dangerous lot, with only the likes of Kenny Tilton to keep us
> from cutting a bloody swath through the crowds of newbies standing
> around with bewildered looks on their faces.
The Savages of Comp.Lang.Lisp.
We should have a celebrity softball game with the Yobbos of #Lisp IRC,
raise some money for the new Shroud of Secrecy the ALU wants to buy.
:)
kt
"Kenny Tilton" <·······@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
···························@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> We should have a celebrity softball game with the Yobbos of #Lisp IRC,
> raise some money for the new Shroud of Secrecy the ALU wants to buy.
Their old shroud of secrecy as well as their cone of silence seem to be
fully operational. What would be the advantage of a new one?
Fred Gilham <······@snapdragon.csl.sri.com> writes:
> Though I admit we haven't got the firepower of the Scheme crowd.
Surely belt fed machine guns iterate through the links rather than
recurse? Or could the M2 be considered tail-recursive?
--
An ideal world is left as an excercise to the reader.
--- Paul Graham, On Lisp 8.1
Fred Gilham wrote:
> Though I admit we haven't got the firepower of the Scheme crowd.
Following the guidelines of D.J.McCarthy, can I quote you like this?
"Though I admit we haven't got the firepower of the Scheme crowd."
Fred Gilham, a Common Lisper
In case some have forgotten the guide lines:
Very little happens on Usenet without some sort of response from
some other reader. Fun With Usenet postings are no exception.
Since there are some who might question the rationale of some
of the excerpts included therein, I have written up a list of
guidelines that sum up the philosophy behind these postings.
One. I never cut out words in the middle of a quote without a
VERY good reason, and I never cut them out without including
ellipses. For instance, "I am not a goob" might become
"I am ... a goob", but that's too mundane to bother with.
"I'm flame proof" might (and has) become "I'm ...a... p...oof"
but that's REALLY stretching it.
Two. If I cut words off the beginning or end of a quote, I
don't put ellipses, but neither do I capitalize something
that wasn't capitalized before the cut. "I don't think that
the Church of Ubizmo is a wonderful place" would turn into
"the Church of Ubizmo is a wonderful place". Imagine the posting
as a tape-recording of the poster's thoughts. If I can set up
the quote via fast-forwarding and stopping the tape, and without
splicing, I don't put ellipses in. And by the way, I love using
this mechanism for turning things around. If you think something
stinks, say so - don't say you don't think it's wonderful.
D. J. McCarthy
--
Jens Axel Søgaard
Jens Axel S�gaard wrote:
> Following the guidelines of D.J.McCarthy, can I quote you like this?
>
> "Though I admit we haven't got the firepower of the Scheme crowd."
> Fred Gilham, a Common Lisper
OK, but it's dreadfully out of context. I was thinking of Olin
Shivers when I wrote this. :-)
http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/shivers/autoweapons.html
--
Fred Gilham ······@csl.sri.com || GOVERNMENT: A large charity
organization with a coercive fund-raising arm. PUBLIC SCHOOLS:
Government-run (see above) schools with coercive admissions
departments.
Fred Gilham wrote:
> OK, but it's dreadfully out of context. I was thinking of Olin
> Shivers when I wrote this. :-)
>
> http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/shivers/autoweapons.html
A true classic. Given this experience
<http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/shivers/rants/msoft.html>
I begin to understand the appeal and usefulness of a .223.
--
Jens Axel Søgaard
Jens Axel Søgaard <······@soegaard.net> writes:
> Fred Gilham wrote:
>
> > OK, but it's dreadfully out of context. I was thinking of Olin
> > Shivers when I wrote this. :-)
> > http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/shivers/autoweapons.html
>
> A true classic. Given this experience
>
> <http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/shivers/rants/msoft.html>
>
> I begin to understand the appeal and usefulness of a .223.
I could understand this at CMU since in PA, machine guns are legal.
But MIT? MA has prohibition!
The .223 has been dominating Camp Perry Nationals for a few years
now. The mouse that roared, no?
"When I switched from guncotton to standard ball powder on my .223
loads, the gas ports on my M16 would clog like you wouldn't
believe. Steer clear of that stuff."
I like VV powder myself. I've only used it in a 700VS myself. I
guess if I had a match AR-15, I would also use it in that.
Oh. Wait. This isn't rec.guns. Oh well.
--
An ideal world is left as an excercise to the reader.
--- Paul Graham, On Lisp 8.1
David Steuber <·····@david-steuber.com> writes:
> Jens Axel Søgaard <······@soegaard.net> writes:
>
> > Fred Gilham wrote:
> >
> > > OK, but it's dreadfully out of context. I was thinking of Olin
> > > Shivers when I wrote this. :-)
> > > http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/shivers/autoweapons.html
> >
> > A true classic. Given this experience
> >
> > <http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/shivers/rants/msoft.html>
> >
> > I begin to under standtheappealandusefulnessofa.223.
>
> I could understand this at CMU since in PA, machine guns are legal.
> But MIT? MA has prohibition!
I think you can possess machine guns in Massachusetts if you are
an instructor to the police or a C&R collector. However, issuance
will be denied for purposes of sporting, hunting, or defense.
Whether they actually will issue any permits is unknown to me.
(I do actually know a guy around here who was licensed to carry a
machine gun, but it was for defensive purposes - he was a diamond
courrier. This was accomplished by some dubious mechanism where
he was deputized as a police officer, and he had to store "his"
gun at the local police station.)
There are a lot of weird gun laws here, though, and it varies
according to local jurisdiction (eg. Boston).
It's not a gun-friendly state.