3 ms·

I'm missing a lot of the ones I used. Though most of them weren't that different from normal texteditors in a terminal. Well, they were actually editors in a te

by Moru 9y ago

I'm missing a lot of the ones I used. Though most of them weren't that different from normal texteditors in a terminal. Well, they were actually editors in a terminal... Cobol on an IBM AS/400 RPG also on an IBM AS/400 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_RPG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_RPG Devpac Assembler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiSoft_Systems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiSoft_Systems STOS Basic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOS_BASIC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOS_BASIC PLC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programmable_logic_controller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programmable_logic_controller

carey 9y ago
The Wikipedia page doesn’t really give any impression of what it’s like to program in RPG with SEU, and with SDA. I wouldn’t say they’re very close to using vi or Emacs at all. I have very bad memories of STOS BASIC, mostly around how very slow it was.
- Moru 9y ago
  The RPG we used was column based, Flag number in this column, command in that column and so on. We used paper to do the program and then keyed in on a terminal emulator running on a ps/2 that was connected to the central computer over a modem. When running programs they got put in a batch queue and we had to wait until it was our turn and then the printer started spitting out the resulting data. You made sure to think before running things :-)
richardjdare 9y ago
The Amiga version of STOS, AMOS, was nice and quite popular. Wasn't as fast as Blitz Basic II though. There were some interesting "multimedia authoring systems" on the Amiga which might warrant inclusion, such as Amiga Vision (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7KIZQzYSls https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7KIZQzYSls) and Scala (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k20Wvlqb96g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k20Wvlqb96g)
- vidarh 9y ago
  The modern "descendants" of the latter could be said to be Hollywood, which is alo available on non-Amiga platforms: http://www.hollywood-mal.com/screenshots.html http://www.hollywood-mal.com/screenshots.html
mgsloan1 9y ago
Jonathan Edward's research has explored novel ways of programming, so naturally this selection is going to be more focused on atypical interfaces. Those environments that you used are very similar to current programming systems, and so they probably don't make the cut of being thought provoking and informative to look at in 2018. Beyond the historical curiosity and nostalgia, that is.

by Moru 9y ago

carey 9y ago

The Wikipedia page doesn’t really give any impression of what it’s like to program in RPG with SEU, and with SDA. I wouldn’t say they’re very close to using vi or Emacs at all. I have very bad memories of STOS BASIC, mostly around how very slow it was.

Moru 9y ago
The RPG we used was column based, Flag number in this column, command in that column and so on. We used paper to do the program and then keyed in on a terminal emulator running on a ps/2 that was connected to the central computer over a modem. When running programs they got put in a batch queue and we had to wait until it was our turn and then the printer started spitting out the resulting data. You made sure to think before running things :-)

richardjdare 9y ago

The Amiga version of STOS, AMOS, was nice and quite popular. Wasn't as fast as Blitz Basic II though. There were some interesting "multimedia authoring systems" on the Amiga which might warrant inclusion, such as Amiga Vision (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7KIZQzYSls https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7KIZQzYSls) and Scala (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k20Wvlqb96g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k20Wvlqb96g)

vidarh 9y ago
The modern "descendants" of the latter could be said to be Hollywood, which is alo available on non-Amiga platforms: http://www.hollywood-mal.com/screenshots.html http://www.hollywood-mal.com/screenshots.html

mgsloan1 9y ago

Jonathan Edward's research has explored novel ways of programming, so naturally this selection is going to be more focused on atypical interfaces. Those environments that you used are very similar to current programming systems, and so they probably don't make the cut of being thought provoking and informative to look at in 2018. Beyond the historical curiosity and nostalgia, that is.