4 ms·

>While no one programming legend can possibly accomplish any big feat solo, there are programmers worthy of fame for their supreme productivity. Actually at le

by xiaoma 11y ago

>While no one programming legend can possibly accomplish any big feat solo, there are programmers worthy of fame for their supreme productivity. Actually at least one programming legend did according to many: ------ Woz designed all the hardware and all the circuit boards and all the software that went into the Apple II, while the other Steve spewed marketing talk at potential investors and customers on the phone. Every piece and bit and byte of that computer was done by Woz, and not one bug has ever been found, “not one bug in the hardware, not one bug in the software.”[15] The circuit design of the Apple II is widely considered to be astonishingly beautiful, as close to perfection as one can get in engineering. Woz did both hardware and software. Woz created a programming language in machine code. Woz is hardcore. -Geek Sublime: The Beauty of Code, the Code of Beauty

Kenji 11y ago
Wow, thank you for that quote. That boggles my mind. Not one bug? I've seen impressive programmers in my life but never like this.
- nickpsecurity 11y ago
  Look at Wirth's and Gutknecht's Lilith project. After seeing Xerox's PC's, they independently from Apple invented a PC and GUI line involving: a custom computer; a CPU from bit-slice chip; an ideal assembler (M-code); a high-level, safer language (Modula-2) built for it; compiler; primitive OS; basic tools. This work and much of its methodology later became the Oberon language and system, also a 2 person job. They also implemented custom HDL's and hardware for it later on. I believe one person, esp of Wirth's or Gutknecht's capacity, could've built all this albeit with a lot more time required. The key was simplicity, layers, understanding each module, and incrementally building them. Lilith System http://www.cfbsoftware.com/modula2/Lilith.pdf http://www.cfbsoftware.com/modula2/Lilith.pdf Oberon System http://e-collection.library.ethz.ch/eserv/eth:3180/eth-3180-01.pdf http://e-collection.library.ethz.ch/eserv/eth:3180/eth-3180-... Synthesis of Hardware Circuits from Sequential Programs http://inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/Oberon/286.pdf http://inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/Oberon/286.pdf The processors http://oberoncore.ru/_media/library/computersystemdesign.pdf http://oberoncore.ru/_media/library/computersystemdesign.pdf People like them are the true "full-stack" developers. Apps, OS, circuits... coded it all and integrated it cleanly usually in 2 year periods.
  - lobster_johnson 11y ago
    One interesting aspect of Wirth's work, which is illustrated by Oberon, is that he always iterated — from Pascal (itself heavily influenced by ALGOL) to Modula, to Modula-2, to Oberon, then finally Oberon 02. Apple's ObjectPascal is in there somewhere. For example, as I understand it, Oberon was basically bootstrapped with Modula-2. They're all Pascal-like, and therefore ALGOL-like, sharing a lot of similarities; not just syntax, but also concepts such as ranged types, range-bound arrays, enums, record syntax, etc. You can know Pascal and be able to pick up Modula or Oberon very quickly, since so many keywords and concepts are identical. At the same time, each iteration tried to simplify the language (the BNF for Oberon has only 33 grammar rules).
    - nickpsecurity 11y ago
      That's a good point. A strength of his improvements in terms of learning curve and re-using prior work. He was always good at that part. However, I like best how he designed the assembly languages (P-code, M-code) and high-level languages (Pascal, Modula-2) to be consistent with one another. Some called it a hack but I think it's brilliant. Imagine how easy it would be to learn inline assembler if its workings matched the language behavior already described to you. It's like explaining stacks, frames, goto and math in C was about all it took to know x86 programming. It would make both ends more effective. He did it for ease of implementation and compilation. Still need that for formal verification of whole systems, securing whole systems, people that like to experiment with them, and so on. So, his principle stands the test of time.
minthd 11y ago
"Woz prototyped the guts of the Apple II, but needed a lot of help from people like Fernandez to turn it into reliable, repeatable hardware": https://www.reddit.com/r/business/comments/3jyovw/woz_jobs_didnt_design_apple_computers/cutjv23 https://www.reddit.com/r/business/comments/3jyovw/woz_jobs_d...
akavel 11y ago
Also, how about: - Donald Knuth (TeX, METAFONT); even more surprising here given that he's mentioned in the article a few times on other accounts; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Knuth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Knuth - Fabrice Bellard (QEMU, FFmpeg, & other) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabrice_Bellard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabrice_Bellard
- nickpsecurity 11y ago
  Good examples.
- graycat 11y ago
  Right. You saved me from making this outstanding correction. So, Knuth did TeX, METAFONT, Web, Weave, and Tangle for literate programming, and published the literate version of the code. Essentially just one guy.
- xiaoma 11y ago
  Or Bill Joy: vi, c shell and large parts of BSD.
- kragen 11y ago
  Knuth had help from his graduate students. Some of them did their dissertations on work they did in TeX and I think METAFONT too.
  - akavel 11y ago
    hmm; "[citation needed]", although I've already found something via Wikipedia: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/1999-q2/msg00419.html https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/1999-q2/msg00419.html "[...] Knuth definitely wrote most of the code himself, at least for the Metafont re-write, for which I have pesonal knowledge. However, some of his students (such as Michael Plass and John Hobby) did work on the algorithms used in TeX and Metafont. He also did have a programmer (David something) working for him at one point, but not as I recall at the time of the Metafont re-write." That said, some solid source on the earliest phases, as well as on particulars of the specific "algorithms", would be nice to learn.
nickpsecurity 11y ago
I intended to prove that wrong one day given what I've seen Moore, Wirth, LISP machine people, etc do with no more than two people. However, if I'm to be honest, anything I come up with individually will be a rehash of what a bunch of others came up with. So, hard to even say it was my own work unless I did something radically different across the board from the circuits up.
- hga 11y ago
  The Lisp Machine project had way more than 2 people, and something more than 2 full time equivalents.
  - nickpsecurity 11y ago
    Possible. I just saw Steel Jr and Sussman's names. Then implied a LISP machine could be made with 1 person if it could be made with 2. Just take more time. So, if not that one, than any that was only done with 2 people.
    - hga 11y ago
      Errr, to my knowledge, neither of them made major contributions to the Lisp Machine, outside of perhaps ideas. It sounds like you're referring to their Scheme chip project, which they did not have the resources to push to success, e.g. getting the microcode right in one or two tries (the computing resources to simulate it were not available). The Lisp Machine proper was a project done with TTL and fathered by Richard Greenblatt, who probably did some hardware design and more likely microcode work, as well as system software as I recall. However the principle hardware designer was Tom Knight, David Moon wrote a lot of microcode (the Lisp Machine's microcode did a lot, e.g. eval, GC, the bytecode interpreter), he and Dan Weinreb are the only authors listed on the cover of the 1981 4th edition of the manual, Weinreb wrote the first text editor for it, the per Wikipedia and my faint memory the 2nd EMACS implementation, and the first with a GUI and done in Lisp. Howard Cannon developed the Flavors OO extension, with which I remember a lot of the GUI was implemented. It was a pretty big project; hmmm, TempleOS is the only "comprehensive" OS I can think of that was done by one or two people.
crimsonalucard 11y ago
not one bug? lets be real.

by xiaoma 11y ago

Kenji 11y ago

Wow, thank you for that quote. That boggles my mind. Not one bug? I've seen impressive programmers in my life but never like this.

nickpsecurity 11y ago
Look at Wirth's and Gutknecht's Lilith project. After seeing Xerox's PC's, they independently from Apple invented a PC and GUI line involving: a custom computer; a CPU from bit-slice chip; an ideal assembler (M-code); a high-level, safer language (Modula-2) built for it; compiler; primitive OS; basic tools. This work and much of its methodology later became the Oberon language and system, also a 2 person job. They also implemented custom HDL's and hardware for it later on. I believe one person, esp of Wirth's or Gutknecht's capacity, could've built all this albeit with a lot more time required. The key was simplicity, layers, understanding each module, and incrementally building them. Lilith System http://www.cfbsoftware.com/modula2/Lilith.pdf http://www.cfbsoftware.com/modula2/Lilith.pdf Oberon System http://e-collection.library.ethz.ch/eserv/eth:3180/eth-3180-01.pdf http://e-collection.library.ethz.ch/eserv/eth:3180/eth-3180-... Synthesis of Hardware Circuits from Sequential Programs http://inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/Oberon/286.pdf http://inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/Oberon/286.pdf The processors http://oberoncore.ru/_media/library/computersystemdesign.pdf http://oberoncore.ru/_media/library/computersystemdesign.pdf People like them are the true "full-stack" developers. Apps, OS, circuits... coded it all and integrated it cleanly usually in 2 year periods.
- lobster_johnson 11y ago
  One interesting aspect of Wirth's work, which is illustrated by Oberon, is that he always iterated — from Pascal (itself heavily influenced by ALGOL) to Modula, to Modula-2, to Oberon, then finally Oberon 02. Apple's ObjectPascal is in there somewhere. For example, as I understand it, Oberon was basically bootstrapped with Modula-2. They're all Pascal-like, and therefore ALGOL-like, sharing a lot of similarities; not just syntax, but also concepts such as ranged types, range-bound arrays, enums, record syntax, etc. You can know Pascal and be able to pick up Modula or Oberon very quickly, since so many keywords and concepts are identical. At the same time, each iteration tried to simplify the language (the BNF for Oberon has only 33 grammar rules).
  - nickpsecurity 11y ago
    That's a good point. A strength of his improvements in terms of learning curve and re-using prior work. He was always good at that part. However, I like best how he designed the assembly languages (P-code, M-code) and high-level languages (Pascal, Modula-2) to be consistent with one another. Some called it a hack but I think it's brilliant. Imagine how easy it would be to learn inline assembler if its workings matched the language behavior already described to you. It's like explaining stacks, frames, goto and math in C was about all it took to know x86 programming. It would make both ends more effective. He did it for ease of implementation and compilation. Still need that for formal verification of whole systems, securing whole systems, people that like to experiment with them, and so on. So, his principle stands the test of time.

minthd 11y ago

"Woz prototyped the guts of the Apple II, but needed a lot of help from people like Fernandez to turn it into reliable, repeatable hardware": https://www.reddit.com/r/business/comments/3jyovw/woz_jobs_didnt_design_apple_computers/cutjv23 https://www.reddit.com/r/business/comments/3jyovw/woz_jobs_d...

akavel 11y ago

Also, how about: - Donald Knuth (TeX, METAFONT); even more surprising here given that he's mentioned in the article a few times on other accounts; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Knuth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Knuth - Fabrice Bellard (QEMU, FFmpeg, & other) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabrice_Bellard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabrice_Bellard

nickpsecurity 11y ago
Good examples.
graycat 11y ago
Right. You saved me from making this outstanding correction. So, Knuth did TeX, METAFONT, Web, Weave, and Tangle for literate programming, and published the literate version of the code. Essentially just one guy.
xiaoma 11y ago
Or Bill Joy: vi, c shell and large parts of BSD.
kragen 11y ago
Knuth had help from his graduate students. Some of them did their dissertations on work they did in TeX and I think METAFONT too.
- akavel 11y ago
  hmm; "[citation needed]", although I've already found something via Wikipedia: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/1999-q2/msg00419.html https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/1999-q2/msg00419.html "[...] Knuth definitely wrote most of the code himself, at least for the Metafont re-write, for which I have pesonal knowledge. However, some of his students (such as Michael Plass and John Hobby) did work on the algorithms used in TeX and Metafont. He also did have a programmer (David something) working for him at one point, but not as I recall at the time of the Metafont re-write." That said, some solid source on the earliest phases, as well as on particulars of the specific "algorithms", would be nice to learn.

nickpsecurity 11y ago

I intended to prove that wrong one day given what I've seen Moore, Wirth, LISP machine people, etc do with no more than two people. However, if I'm to be honest, anything I come up with individually will be a rehash of what a bunch of others came up with. So, hard to even say it was my own work unless I did something radically different across the board from the circuits up.

hga 11y ago
The Lisp Machine project had way more than 2 people, and something more than 2 full time equivalents.
- nickpsecurity 11y ago
  Possible. I just saw Steel Jr and Sussman's names. Then implied a LISP machine could be made with 1 person if it could be made with 2. Just take more time. So, if not that one, than any that was only done with 2 people.
  - hga 11y ago
    Errr, to my knowledge, neither of them made major contributions to the Lisp Machine, outside of perhaps ideas. It sounds like you're referring to their Scheme chip project, which they did not have the resources to push to success, e.g. getting the microcode right in one or two tries (the computing resources to simulate it were not available). The Lisp Machine proper was a project done with TTL and fathered by Richard Greenblatt, who probably did some hardware design and more likely microcode work, as well as system software as I recall. However the principle hardware designer was Tom Knight, David Moon wrote a lot of microcode (the Lisp Machine's microcode did a lot, e.g. eval, GC, the bytecode interpreter), he and Dan Weinreb are the only authors listed on the cover of the 1981 4th edition of the manual, Weinreb wrote the first text editor for it, the per Wikipedia and my faint memory the 2nd EMACS implementation, and the first with a GUI and done in Lisp. Howard Cannon developed the Flavors OO extension, with which I remember a lot of the GUI was implemented. It was a pretty big project; hmmm, TempleOS is the only "comprehensive" OS I can think of that was done by one or two people.

crimsonalucard 11y ago

not one bug? lets be real.