5 ms·

Programming on the Mac was the second worse experience I'd had - second only to a terminal Lisp system that had no backspace and thus no ability to fix a typing

Programming on the Mac was the second worse experience I'd had - second only to a terminal Lisp system that had no backspace and thus no ability to fix a typing mistake. Both were in fact worse than the punched cards where I first learned to program. Edit: Mac programming was in 1984; Lisp in 1983; Punched cards in 1980

phoehne 3y ago
Learning C++ programming on OS 7 put hair on my chest. After that Unix was a walk in the park.
fulladder 3y ago
I think programming was a fairly miserable experience on all platforms before about 2000. In the early days, there wasn't enough surplus computation available to devote any of it to programmer ergonomics. Today we have IDEs that can make accurate autocomplete suggestions, compilers with detailed error messages (and even suggestions on what the mistake probably is), shells that tab complete really effectively, etc. Before ~2000, there just weren't enough spare cycles to do any of that stuff particularly well.
- JoyfulTurkey 3y ago
  The biggest advantage I found when learning on DOS and Windows in the 1990s was the overall lack of distractions. No smart phone, YouTube, Reddit/HackerNews let me fully concentrate.
  - fulladder 3y ago
    Yeah, I totally agree. Computers for a long time were not a communications device the way they are today. You could buy a modem and use it communicate, but that was a distinct activity and once exited the terminal program you were once again by yourself. Now, the communications function is this always on thing that never goes away. It's interwoven with every other activity you do. That makes the whole experience much different.
  - tonyedgecombe 3y ago
    I'd quite like to drop our internet connection. If I needed to do something online I could visit my local cafe or library. There is no way my family would agree to that though.
- indymike 3y ago
  The change happened in the 80s with Borland’s Turbo products.
  - fulladder 3y ago
    I had Turbo Pascal and Turbo C. The compilers were insanely fast compared to what had come before. But I still think that programmer ergonomics sucked. There was no syntax highlighting, definitely no autocomplete, and it couldn't necessarily find all the syntax errors on the first pass, so you'd fix a few errors, recompile, and there'd be a new set of errors. That's my recollection anyway.
    - indymike 3y ago
      It was 1991's Turbo C++ 3.0 (they merged Turbo C and Turbo C++ with that product) that had syntax highlighting and code folding, so it wasn't the 80s :-). Hard to believe, but Turbo C came out in 1987 and was pretty primitive. I seem to remember the early version of Turbo C would just hard stop on the first syntax error. Fun times.
    - tonyedgecombe 3y ago
      I don't think we knew what we were missing though. I just remember how fast it was and being amazed that it came with four inches of printed documentation.
    - pjmlp 3y ago
      Borland introduced syntax highlight on Turbo Pascal 7 for MS-DOS, if memory serves me right, while all their products for OS/2 and Windows 3.x provided it from the start. Autocomplete came around Borland C++ 4.0 timeframe, or something like that.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  My first IDE experience was in 1992, with Borland tools, which I used most of them until 2000. During this time using UNIX was a pain, only lessen by an heavily customized version of XEmacs. On Amiga, Windows, Mac OS and OS/2, no biggie, there were good IDE experiences already.
a1369209993 3y ago
> second only to a terminal Lisp system that had no backspace and thus no ability to fix a typing mistake. To be fair, the 'proper' way to deal with that is probably to write some Lisp code to patch the running editor to add backspace functionality. That's not really reasonable for someone (presumably) still learning Lisp, though. (And chances are it wasn't a true Scotsman^WLisp system and didn't support that anyway.)
- intrasight 3y ago
  To be fair - it did force me to be 100% correct ;)
lispm 3y ago
Lisp programming on the Mac was actually great. Apple maintained and sold for a while "Macintosh Common Lisp", which was a lot of fun.
- kaveh808 3y ago
  MCL was a delight to program in. Ran in 2MB on my PowerBook 170 and gave high-level support for GUI development. It lives on a Clozure Common Lisp, though there is no version for Apple M processors. Kind of a shame.

phoehne 3y ago

Learning C++ programming on OS 7 put hair on my chest. After that Unix was a walk in the park.

fulladder 3y ago

I think programming was a fairly miserable experience on all platforms before about 2000. In the early days, there wasn't enough surplus computation available to devote any of it to programmer ergonomics. Today we have IDEs that can make accurate autocomplete suggestions, compilers with detailed error messages (and even suggestions on what the mistake probably is), shells that tab complete really effectively, etc. Before ~2000, there just weren't enough spare cycles to do any of that stuff particularly well.

JoyfulTurkey 3y ago
The biggest advantage I found when learning on DOS and Windows in the 1990s was the overall lack of distractions. No smart phone, YouTube, Reddit/HackerNews let me fully concentrate.
- fulladder 3y ago
  Yeah, I totally agree. Computers for a long time were not a communications device the way they are today. You could buy a modem and use it communicate, but that was a distinct activity and once exited the terminal program you were once again by yourself. Now, the communications function is this always on thing that never goes away. It's interwoven with every other activity you do. That makes the whole experience much different.
- tonyedgecombe 3y ago
  I'd quite like to drop our internet connection. If I needed to do something online I could visit my local cafe or library. There is no way my family would agree to that though.
indymike 3y ago
The change happened in the 80s with Borland’s Turbo products.
- fulladder 3y ago
  I had Turbo Pascal and Turbo C. The compilers were insanely fast compared to what had come before. But I still think that programmer ergonomics sucked. There was no syntax highlighting, definitely no autocomplete, and it couldn't necessarily find all the syntax errors on the first pass, so you'd fix a few errors, recompile, and there'd be a new set of errors. That's my recollection anyway.
  - indymike 3y ago
    It was 1991's Turbo C++ 3.0 (they merged Turbo C and Turbo C++ with that product) that had syntax highlighting and code folding, so it wasn't the 80s :-). Hard to believe, but Turbo C came out in 1987 and was pretty primitive. I seem to remember the early version of Turbo C would just hard stop on the first syntax error. Fun times.
  - tonyedgecombe 3y ago
    I don't think we knew what we were missing though. I just remember how fast it was and being amazed that it came with four inches of printed documentation.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    Borland introduced syntax highlight on Turbo Pascal 7 for MS-DOS, if memory serves me right, while all their products for OS/2 and Windows 3.x provided it from the start. Autocomplete came around Borland C++ 4.0 timeframe, or something like that.
pjmlp 3y ago
My first IDE experience was in 1992, with Borland tools, which I used most of them until 2000. During this time using UNIX was a pain, only lessen by an heavily customized version of XEmacs. On Amiga, Windows, Mac OS and OS/2, no biggie, there were good IDE experiences already.

a1369209993 3y ago

> second only to a terminal Lisp system that had no backspace and thus no ability to fix a typing mistake. To be fair, the 'proper' way to deal with that is probably to write some Lisp code to patch the running editor to add backspace functionality. That's not really reasonable for someone (presumably) still learning Lisp, though. (And chances are it wasn't a true Scotsman^WLisp system and didn't support that anyway.)

intrasight 3y ago
To be fair - it did force me to be 100% correct ;)

lispm 3y ago

Lisp programming on the Mac was actually great. Apple maintained and sold for a while "Macintosh Common Lisp", which was a lot of fun.

kaveh808 3y ago
MCL was a delight to program in. Ran in 2MB on my PowerBook 170 and gave high-level support for GUI development. It lives on a Clozure Common Lisp, though there is no version for Apple M processors. Kind of a shame.