XPost: alt.folklore.computers   
   From: Peter@Iron-Spring.com   
      
   On 1/8/26 23:36, rbowman wrote:   
   > On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 20:54:14 -0500, c186282 wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 1/8/26 14:52, rbowman wrote:   
   >>> On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 02:26:25 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2026 19:21:09 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> FORTRAN and COBOL are still around, but I don't thinks anyone from   
   >>>>> the 70s would recognize them.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> COBOL is still COBOL. Fortran has evolved somewhat, post-Fortran-77.   
   >>>   
   >>> Yeah, you don't need the continuation punch in column 6 :) I should   
   >>> take a look and see if that much has really changed,   
   >>   
   >>     AAAAUUUGGGHHH ! You just triggered my PTSD about FORTRAN and PUNCH   
   >>     CARDS !!!  :-)   
   >   
   > Don't forget the coding forms.   
   >   
   > https://archive.org/details/fortrancodingform   
   >   
   > More horrors from the past:   
   >   
   > https://www.math-cs.gordon.edu/courses/cs323/FORTRAN/fortran.html   
   >   
   > I was so scarred by the initial brush with programming it was about 10   
   > years before I had any interest in it. Of course the game had changed. You   
   > could wirewrap up a working Z80 on the kitchen table and replace a 3'x3'   
   > panel full of ice cube relays or a bushel of TTLs with a much less   
   > physical implementation of logic.\   
      
   I spent a couple of years writing FORTRAN for the 1130. They called it   
   FORTRAN IV, but it was more like III.V, but still better than OS FORTRAN   
   at the time. Later I worked on an XDS Sigma system, and their FORTRAN   
   was great (as you'd expect with its SDS heritage). At the time I liked   
   the language, but I always preferred PL/I.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)