[9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Laura Creighton]

I don't think that Jim Choate and I are talking about the same problem
domains.  I've worked for the Ontario Science Centre as well, though
for fewer years, and I was trying to determine things like `how many
buttons should you put on your exhibit' not `how do you teach hard
science concepts to people who do not have a scientific background
(and can you)'.

But I have had a rather great advantage when studying how people learn
things.  I had access to soldiers (and sailors, and airmen).  They can
be _ordered_ to learn something.  Then you can watch how they do it.
So, from one point of view, a good user interface is something that is
attached to a tool that I can train people to use well in about 3
weeks, given that I can order them to learn it.  Deep conceptual
understanding of principles is beside the point.

For instance, here is a trick.  Sit in a classroom with windows on the
left side with trees and such outside.  Then put a maps and stuff on
the right side.  Stand, either in the back row of the classroom behind
your students, or in the front with your back to them.  Then have them
raise their hands and right click Belgium. Left click the Pine
tree. And so on and so forth.  Train them to point with a not index
finger.  No deep conceptual understanding required ... this is a
``muscle memory'' you want to train into these people.

I get very worried when Jim Choate says that the inability to learn
certain things is based on biological factors.  Any user interface
that requires you to learn lots of theory just to _use_ it, is, in my
professional opinion >badly designed<.  I know too many computer
designers who think that they need to design things differently for
the dumb users, because, after all, they are dumb, and I'm smart.
<NOTE for people who leap to conclusions: I am _not_ saying that Jim
Choate is one of them.> I give these people a kick whenever I find
them.  Anything that encourages them to believe that they can get away
with designing rotten user interfaces because they are biologically
superior to the rest of the world must be attacked with a machete
whenever you find it.  And yes, some of these people are making Boyd's
life less pleasant than it could be because they do indeed like to
make things complicated because their crippled egos (or lack of
judgement, or _something_), desparately compels them to fill their
world with things that they can use to demonstrate how incredibly
smart they are.  The ability to impress other people and themselves
with how smart they are is a #1 motivating factor for them.  The armed
forces of the world know all about this human weakness and have
designed strategies to elmininate it.  Unfortunately it is harder to
take these lessons and stick them to the people who are not in the
military and who also desparately need them.

New demonstration:  How many of you understood that the reason that you
have to stand behind your students or with your back to them is so that
your right and their right will be the same direction?  My technique
of teaching people how to right-click will work even if you just do
what I say without understanding this point.  See what I mean when
I say deep understanding is beside the point?

One problem I keep running into is the fact that computer people, in
general, do not understand how people who are not scientists and
engineers learn.  Most especially they do not understand how people
who are not enjoying learning what they are learning learn. They don't
watch how _they, themselves_ learn things they don't enjoy all that
well.  One thing that is very common is to learn by complaining about
how hard it is to learn something.  Nerds do this as well, but they
tend to complain about how hard it is to learn to do some physical
sport, or some meaningless social convention, or in some countries
their taxes ...  This makes it hard to tell whether a complaint about
that something is hard to learn to use should be filed under `fix
your design' or `he is just learning'.

Some designers are busy trying to make sure that their user interface
is inherantly _enjoyable_, or, in a Walt Disney sort of way
_entertaining_. They want to give people an enjoyable experience.  And
if they are designing a tool that people use once a year or so ... ie
they will always be naive users ... then they are tremendously
successful, as they will be when the demands of being enjoyable do not
conflict with the demands of good for accomplishing a lot of useful
work.  But the interface that somebody uses to book a vacation trip
once a year on a web form is generally not the interface that the
professional travel agent wants to use to book hundreds of trips every
day.

Quote:  ``I don't want to understand what I am doing, I just want to
know how to do it well.''  This is a very common empassioned plea of
somebody who wants to be well trained in how to use a thing.  This
person doesn't want to waste his valuable time thinking about
user interface design or the client-server architectures or anything
like that.  They have their own problem domain and they want to keep
their minds on _that_ while they are using a tool to get real work done.

I want my tax form to work like that too.  There world is full of
things I don't want to understand because I know I am mortal and I
am going to be dead before I understand all of them.  I need to
prioritize what I learn, even though I think that learning is fun.

Please assume that the person you are writing your user interface for
is about twice as hard working as you are and that they have a much
more important, challenging, and interesting job than you do.  Then give
them the tool that lets them get major amounts of work done in their
chosen field.  This is much more profitable than designing for
artichokes.

Plan 9 relevance?  I don't know of anybody who is using plan 9 to do
anything but program, and play music, and people are using
their Bitsy to be a PDA.  So of course Plan 9 is cool for programming.
Anybody out there using it to do something else?  If so, can you speak
up and tell us what interface(s) you are using, and if you want any
changes?  Can you also indicate how long you have been using this
interface, since I think new-user-problems are rather different than
experienced-user-problems?  There. Now we get some data on whether we
need to change something.  My personal belief is that, repetitive
stress concerns aside, we don't need to design a new interface. The
problem with Plan 9 is that people who don't want to program say --
what will Plan 9 give me? and then they answer 'nothing', and then
they don't use Plan 9.  The interface is beside the point.  Somebody
speak up and correct me if I am wrong.

Laura ... who can't write any more for a while.  I have way too much
real work to do, and a deadline, alas.  But I got up at 5 am to write this
because I care this much about such things.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Boyd Roberts]

> Anything that encourages them to believe that they can get away
> with designing rotten user interfaces because they are biologically
> superior to the rest of the world must be attacked with a machete
> whenever you find it.  And yes, some of these people are making Boyd's
> life less pleasant than it could be because they do indeed like to
> make things complicated because their crippled egos (or lack of
> judgement, or _something_), desparately compels them to fill their
> world with things that they can use to demonstrate how incredibly
> smart they are.  The ability to impress other people and themselves
> with how smart they are is a #1 motivating factor for them.

this is exactly the problem i've seen in the real world.  it only
demonstrates how stupid they are.  their systems break.  it's
_obvious_ they will break.  and when they do break they can't
fix them.  they will ask others to help them out.  the basic
(and correct) response is:

    throw it away and build it right

but the investment is always seen to be too great so it gets
glued back together so it 'works' and it keeps 'nurses'
employed.  build it so it works and then move on and use
your time to do more interesting things rather than having
it wasted nursing this junk.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

Boyd Roberts wrote:
> ...  build it so it works and then move on ...

Unfortunately, even the best-built software systems tend
to need maintenance.  There are several reasons, including
changing environments and user requirements.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Boyd Roberts]

From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net>
> Unfortunately, even the best-built software systems tend
> to need maintenance.

there's maintenance and then there's _intensive care_.

i've seen far too much of the latter.  i'm just sick of
the sight of the blood.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Steve Kilbane]

>  they will ask others to help them out.  the basic
> (and correct) response is:
>
>     throw it away and build it right
>
> but the investment is always seen to be too great so it gets
> glued back together so it 'works' and it keeps 'nurses'
> employed.

This is possibly the correct approach, actually. Patch it for
them, then leave and get a job with a company that *isn't* about
to be dragged under by a crufty atrocity. :-)

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Boyd Roberts]

> This is possibly the correct approach, actually. Patch it for
> them, then leave and get a job with a company that *isn't* about
> to be dragged under by a crufty atrocity. :-)

i used to be a nurse.  i got a call offering me a job as a nurse.
no way.  i'll take my chances with france's generous unemployment
benefits.  and no, quitting doesn't qualify you for them.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

Laura Creighton wrote:
> But I have had a rather great advantage when studying how people learn
> things.  I had access to soldiers (and sailors, and airmen).  They can
> be _ordered_ to learn something.  Then you can watch how they do it.

Also, fear of the consequences of not learning can be a great
motivator.  I was on the staff of the U.S. Army Security Agency
Training Center & School in the early 1970s, and people who
didn't make the grade found themselves trying not to step on
pungee stakes in the rice paddies etc.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[okamoto]

Laura--

>The problem with Plan 9 is that people who don't want to program say --
>what will Plan 9 give me? and then they answer 'nothing', and then
>they don't use Plan 9.

Plan 9 gives very much comfortable environment for those who have to
maitain many workstations and PCs in a network.  Plan 9  gives very easy
and hence clear way to make program which can be character based or
graphics based or for network applications.   For the graphics based
program, we now only have a tarse defined interface control(2), which
should be extended by us.  This is the motivation when we started calc2
project.  ^_^  Anyway, if you fit one of above conditions, Plan 9 will be
your favourite OS.

On the other hand, Plan 9 doesn't have many applications like excel or word.
If your main purpose to select your OS is to use such applications, you'd do
MS Windows, I think.   This is what I wanted but forgot to say before.

Kenji

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Boyd Roberts]

> On the other hand, Plan 9 doesn't have many applications like excel or word.
> If your main purpose to select your OS is to use such applications, you'd do
> MS Windows, I think.   This is what I wanted but forgot to say before.

yes, this is the 'killer app' theory.  i don't actually want excel -- i'll
use awk.  i don't want word -- i'll use troff.  but the problem is that J.
Random User wants this 'cos it's shiny and flashy and they can point and
click (have it crash on them :) and don't need to know anything about
programming or typography.

i write code.  i grew up with troff.  i use windows as a _terminal_.
well, i have written code for it, but i needed a job and got conned.
in retrospect it was very interesting 'cos i had to learn it from
scratch and the constant 'they did what!?!' suprises taught me why
it doesn't work and how it's very difficult to write a correct
windows program.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Lucio De Re]

On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 12:07:23PM +0200, Boyd Roberts wrote:
>
> yes, this is the 'killer app' theory.  i don't actually want excel -- i'll
> use awk.  i don't want word -- i'll use troff.  but the problem is that J.
> Random User wants this 'cos it's shiny and flashy and they can point and
> click (have it crash on them :) and don't need to know anything about
> programming or typography.
>
Well, you don't have to be a mechanic to drive a car (and have
accidents and failures) or a veterinarian to ride a horse.  And you
have to be able to handle spreadsheets and documents when dealing with
the world at large.  Not a situation you have to be happy with,
any more than, for example, I like freeways, but a situation that has
taken root very firmly.  strings | awk just won't do :-)

The flashy bit, by the way, is incidental, merely the meme's way to
make itself attractive.  Nothing new there, take a look at the rest of
nature :-)

Hm, maybe Plan 9 should also find the key to presenting its meme
material in an irresistible coating.

> i write code.  i grew up with troff.  i use windows as a _terminal_.
> well, i have written code for it, but i needed a job and got conned.
> in retrospect it was very interesting 'cos i had to learn it from
> scratch and the constant 'they did what!?!' suprises taught me why
> it doesn't work and how it's very difficult to write a correct
> windows program.
>
I'm sure most of Microsoft's bad decisions were mandated by time to
market.  And the realisation that is it more profitable to invest in
marketing than in design.  No one else ever perceived the opportunity
in supplying a faulty product with the promise of something better to
come.  Sheer genius.

++L

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Boyd Roberts]

> I'm sure most of Microsoft's bad decisions were mandated by time to
> market.

no.  the core architecture is so flawed and the API so gross
that it had to be sheer bad design.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Lucio De Re]

On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 12:59:21PM +0200, Boyd Roberts wrote:
>
> > I'm sure most of Microsoft's bad decisions were mandated by time to
> > market.
>
> no.  the core architecture is so flawed and the API so gross
> that it had to be sheer bad design.
>
Bad and design?

No more than from Intel (they are to be blamed for CP/M, too),
overlooking the fact that their address bus was wider than the
register size, or scrapping the i860/i960 developments.

They are rushed decisions that can't be reversed.  Everything that
complex needs slow evolution, not cancerous growth.  At the moment
there's still enough nutrient...

++L

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

Lucio De Re wrote:
> No more than from Intel (they are to be blamed for CP/M, too),
> overlooking the fact that their address bus was wider than the
> register size, or scrapping the i860/i960 developments.
> They are rushed decisions that can't be reversed.  ...

Even the original PDP-11 had a wider address bus than its
register (word) size.  It wasn't a "rushed decision", although
in the long run it caused enough trouble that a whole new
architecture was designed to replace it.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Lucio De Re]

On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 03:26:08PM +0000, Douglas A. Gwyn wrote:
>
> Lucio De Re wrote:
> > No more than from Intel (they are to be blamed for CP/M, too),
> > overlooking the fact that their address bus was wider than the
> > register size, or scrapping the i860/i960 developments.
> > They are rushed decisions that can't be reversed.  ...
>
> Even the original PDP-11 had a wider address bus than its
> register (word) size.  It wasn't a "rushed decision", although
> in the long run it caused enough trouble that a whole new
> architecture was designed to replace it.

Do you mean to tell me that DEC had a segmented architecture, with
haphazard default "base" registers, a LOCK instruction to lock the
bus for the following fetch cycle (whatever for? even the Univac
1106 had the more sane test-and-set) and a faulty MOV SS,XX that
did _not_ lock the bus for the following MOV SP,YY as was the
intention?

I bet the 20-bit address was an oversight, one that is still being
dragged along in this era of 64-bit registers.  For heaven's sake,
Intel's marketing hype was full of praise for the ability to have
2^12 (overlapping) segments, and to this day the Pentium has segment
registers.  Worse, one reads of superservers addressing up to
64Gigabytes of main memory - must be programmed in assembler 'cause
it's a long time since I've seen a compiler capable of producing
segmented architecture code.

> architecture was designed to replace it.

No, not to "replace it", but to propagate it.

++L

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Boyd Roberts]

From: "Lucio De Re" <lucio@proxima.alt.za>
> Do you mean to tell me that DEC had a segmented architecture,

the pdp-11 had 8 segment registers.

i know a small amount about it 'cos i hacked a pdp 11/23
kernel so vi would run on it.  hell, the machine has
rl-02's.

the 11 was a good machine.  the 11/70 was real cool.

173000g

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

Lucio De Re wrote:
> Do you mean to tell me that DEC had a segmented architecture, with
> haphazard default "base" registers, a LOCK instruction to lock the
> bus for the following fetch cycle (whatever for? even the Univac
> 1106 had the more sane test-and-set) and a faulty MOV SS,XX that
> did _not_ lock the bus for the following MOV SP,YY as was the
> intention?

The PDP-11 had a segmented architecture in the sense that there
were 8 8KB "pages" in the (D or I) 16-bit address space, each
mapped by an 18-bit offset (constrained modulo 64 as I recall) by
a register in the Memory Mapping Unit.  Later PDP-11s added a
second level of memory management to implement 22 bits of real
address space.  Addresses in opcodes were (at most) 16 bits.  In
"kernel mode" (the equivalent of a PC's "real mode"), such as
under the RT-11 SJ monitor, a user program could load the mapping
registers directly whenever it wanted (although doing it stupidly
would just cause a crash).  I took advantage of that for the PEAC
system (no relation to PEAK-11) in order to access the VS60's
display list from Fortran programs.  A compiler certainly could
have generated code that did something similar to make use of the
full 18-bit address space within "typical" programs, although to
my knowledge no PDP-11 compiler actually did that.  (On UNIX, there
were a couple of implementations of I-space overlays that mapped
instruction code into the 16-bit space as required; I did the
compiler/linker piece of that for BRL/JHU PDP-11 UNIX, and as I
recall Ron Natalie did the kernel piece.  Berkeley did something
similar at the same time, but my "thunks" were smaller and faster.)

MOV R0,(R0)+ was implemented incorrectly on the PDP-11/20, and
the spec for the ISA had to be changed to reflect that.  Later
models got other things wrong; programs could in fact tell models
apart by their semantics for execution of particular code sequences.

PDP-11s were designed without thought being given to test-and-set.
The first several models of PDP-11 could have interlocking done
via INC and ASRB instructions; why this worked is a long story.

We could go on, but this is getting far afield.  The point is that
it isn't just Intel; every computer architecture and implementation
has defects.  I will say that we took a great step backward when
chip manufacturers took over architectural design.  It seems that
every "generation", people reinvent things without taking into
account lessons learned from the previous cycle.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Boyd Roberts]

From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net>
> The PDP-11 had a segmented architecture in the sense that there
> were 8 8KB "pages" in the (D or I) 16-bit address space, each
> mapped by an 18-bit offset (constrained modulo 64 as I recall) by
> a register in the Memory Mapping Unit.

18 bits, that sounds right [128kw].  later there was separate
I & D; two 64 bit address spaces, one for instructions and
the other for data.

> Later PDP-11s added a second level of memory management to implement
> 22 bits of real address space.  Addresses in opcodes were (at most)
> 16 bits.  In "kernel mode" (the equivalent of a PC's "real mode"),
> such as under the RT-11 SJ monitor, a user program could load the
> mapping registers directly whenever it wanted (although doing it stupidly
> would just cause a crash).

iirc the 11/70 had kernel/executive/supervisor/user.

> Berkeley did something similar at the same time, but my "thunks"
> were smaller and faster.)

yes, this was 2.10 bsd?  i remember porting the required bits
to an 11/23 kernel so it could run vi.

> MOV R0,(R0)+ was implemented incorrectly on the PDP-11/20, and
> the spec for the ISA had to be changed to reflect that.  Later
> models got other things wrong; programs could in fact tell models
> apart by their semantics for execution of particular code sequences.

yep, i remember some of the generic kernel boot code (written by
chris maltby?) that exploited this to work out what sort of an
11 it was.

> PDP-11s were designed without thought being given to test-and-set.

iirc, this was added to the vax, but i don't have a 'blue' book.

> I will say that we took a great step backward when
> chip manufacturers took over architectural design.  It seems that
> every "generation", people reinvent things without taking into
> account lessons learned from the previous cycle.

couldn't agree more.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[okamoto]

>Plan 9  gives very easy
>and hence clear way to make program which can be character based or

Ouch!
Above line must be

Plan 9  gives very clear
and hence easy way to make program which can be character based or

Kenji

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[presotto]

> J.
> Random User wants this 'cos it's shiny and flashy and they can point and
> click (have it crash on them :) and don't need to know anything about
> programming or typography.

I think the advantage of excel and word is that you don't have to
remember anything from session to session.  It helps but its not
necessary.  You can do a reasonable job of spread sheet or formatted
document by just starting the program and clicking the buttons that
look right.  The WYSIWYG aspects makes that possible since you get
immediate feedback of what you did.  If you don't like it, do something
else.  There are precious few buttons and the icons are sufficiently
descriptive that you don't have to hunt too much for what you want.

I like the interface though I tend to get absolutely potty by the huge
step in difficulty when you have to go past the obvious point and click
stuff.  Of course, troff has its own problems.  I get equally potty
trying to get breaks to happen where I want them to and usually
end up compromising with it after a few go arounds.  To get some
WYSIWYG feel, I tend to have a loop in a window that looks like:

	while(`{read}){
		troff ... |lp -dstdout > x.ps
		page x.ps
	}

That's usually good enough for me to see quickly the effect of my
changes.  However, WYSIWYG would be nicer.  It might even be worth
doing.  Its just that when most of us get used to troff, the drive
for doing a formatter for the uninitiated goes down.

> > I'm sure most of Microsoft's bad decisions were mandated by time to
> > market.
>
> no.  the core architecture is so flawed and the API so gross
> that it had to be sheer bad design.

I'm not sure these are contrary statements.  I just spent a few
days in Redmond job hunting.  MS's ability to handle complexity
both in design and code is astounding.  I spent some time with
people in the early stage of a large project, part of .NET.  They
are very thoughtful in their designs.  However, they do lack any
fear of complexity, or perhaps more correctly, given the current
weight of MS code, their idea of what's complex is an order of
magnitude or two above mine.  They are VERY focused and they
spend a lot of time feeling out interfaces.  However, they
do feel completely handcuffed by legacy API's.  They can
add to them but not subtract from them.  That means that if
time to market causes them to release a less than wonderful
interface, they're stuck with it for at least 3 releases
before thay can phase any part of it out.  That means the
API's do nothing but get wider and less coherent.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Boyd Roberts]

> while(`{read}){
> troff ... |lp -dstdout > x.ps
> page x.ps
> }

i've fought a lot with �sloth's 'wysiwyg' -- it isn't.
i find myself in exactly the same loop.  i think wordpad
is the _worst_ because from what you saw and printed
a week ago is no longer the same a week later.

given i had all these envelopes with postcode boxes and
i had an OCR font i thought i'd make a generic template
with wordpad and then have a bunch of files with one
address per file and then print them directly on the
envelopes.

to get the generic templates took _hours of pure
hackery_.  later, every time i printed an address
it was always not where it had been.

at least with troff i can say go to (x, y) and put down
some chunk of text.  yes, i will have to loop a bit, to
get the generic, but it _will_ work the next time.

they have a copy of the code to word 2 at la cit� des
sciences et de la technologie (i think that's it).  when
i saw it i thought 'bound to be a chunk of os/360', but
no, a metre high stack of paper -- 600k lines of code.
and _that_ was word 2!

i wrote some code to print stuff on '95.  really simple
(or so you'd think) 4 or 5 columns of text on an A4 page.
impossible, absolutely impossible, without writing a
huge chunk of code.  i cheated.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

presotto@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote:
>         while(`{read}){
>                 troff ... |lp -dstdout > x.ps
>                 page x.ps
>         }
> That's usually good enough for me to see quickly the effect of my
> changes.  However, WYSIWYG would be nicer.  It might even be worth
> doing.  Its just that when most of us get used to troff, the drive
> for doing a formatter for the uninitiated goes down.

Me, too.  I think it would be useful to have a program (script?)
that invoked a text editor ("sam" in my case) and whenever the
source file was modified (sam "w" command), fire up troff|proof
or whatever (including troff macros, etc.) in a *separate* window
to show the current formatted result.  The idea is to not
interrupt the editing session to view the result.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Boyd Roberts]

From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net>
>  The idea is to not interrupt the editing session to view the result.

very cool.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Ralph]

Hi,

> Me, too.  I think it would be useful to have a program (script?) that
> invoked a text editor ("sam" in my case) and whenever the source file
> was modified (sam "w" command), fire up troff|proof or whatever
> (including troff macros, etc.) in a *separate* window to show the
> current formatted result.  The idea is to not interrupt the editing
> session to view the result.

This is effectively what I've done in the past on Unix.  Either
instruct your version of vi to execute a command on every write of the
file or have a script watching the file which does `groff ... >x.ps'.

gv, a GhostScript viewer, already has an option to refresh when the
PostScript file changes.  This has the advantage that you remain at the
bottom of page 5 rather than a new window opening on page 1.


Ralph.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Boyd Roberts]

> gv, a GhostScript viewer, already has an option to refresh when the
> PostScript file changes.

oh good, let's add that option to all programs that read files.

what was readslow(1)'s behaviour on file truncation?  did it
cat the whole file or just display the last n lines?  i was
thinking of some sort of:

    readslow | ps-previewer

checking out stat(2), it's trivial.  use the 'vers' in the Qid:

    Qid is a structure containing path and vers fields, each
    an unsigned long: path is guaranteed to be unique among all
    path names currently on the file server, and vers changes
    each time the file is modified.

so:

    whenmod [ -t timeout ] file cmd [ args ... ]

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Ralph Corderoy]

Salut!

> > gv, a GhostScript viewer, already has an option to refresh when the
> > PostScript file changes.
>
> oh good, let's add that option to all programs that read files.

No Boyd, I wouldn't recommend doing that.  Sounds like you need to read
Kernighan and Plauger's _Software Tools_ where they discuss sort's -u
option.

    It happens to be "more efficient" to put this particular function
    into the sort program.

After the text you quoted I went on to say

> > This has the advantage that you remain at the bottom of page 5
> > rather than a new window opening on page 1.

This is "more efficient".  In this case for the user as well as the
machine.

I'd recommend _Software Tools_;  it's a great book.  You'll like it.

Adieu,


Ralph.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Boyd Roberts]

> > oh good, let's add that option to all programs that read files.
> 
> No Boyd, I wouldn't recommend doing that.  Sounds like you need to read
> Kernighan and Plauger's _Software Tools_ where they discuss sort's -u
> option.

err, that was _sarcasm_.

oh, software tools?  read that -- some twenty years ago.

did you _read_ the rest of what i wrote?

> > > This has the advantage that you remain at the bottom of page 5
> > > rather than a new window opening on page 1.

> This is "more efficient".  In this case for the user as well as the
> machine.

really?  and gv doesn't re-read the whole postscript file?  where's
the efficiency gain?  that it stay's on page n?  you could have an
option that specifies a target page that you're interested in,
avoiding some wasted graphics computation.

windows are cheap.  well, they _are_ on any reasonable window system.
the same goes for processes.  but gv primarily runs on X on unix,
right?  so both are expensive.

> adieu

eh?  nobody says that.  'adieu' is pretty final.  think about its
literal meaning.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[rog]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 686 bytes --]

> Me, too.  I think it would be useful to have a program (script?)
> that invoked a text editor ("sam" in my case) and whenever the
> source file was modified (sam "w" command), fire up troff|proof
> or whatever (including troff macros, etc.) in a *separate* window
> to show the current formatted result.  The idea is to not
> interrupt the editing session to view the result.

i remember ages ago reading in a paper about somebody
(on the Blit?) doing that.

personally, i think it's quite nice *not* to have the visual
feedback all the time - that way i can concentrate
on the content of the text i'm creating without being
distracted by occasional display glitches.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2368 bytes --]

To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:44:05 GMT
Message-ID: <3B4F0AC0.A13D016E@null.net>

presotto@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote:
>         while(`{read}){
>                 troff ... |lp -dstdout > x.ps
>                 page x.ps
>         }
> That's usually good enough for me to see quickly the effect of my
> changes.  However, WYSIWYG would be nicer.  It might even be worth
> doing.  Its just that when most of us get used to troff, the drive
> for doing a formatter for the uninitiated goes down.

Me, too.  I think it would be useful to have a program (script?)
that invoked a text editor ("sam" in my case) and whenever the
source file was modified (sam "w" command), fire up troff|proof
or whatever (including troff macros, etc.) in a *separate* window
to show the current formatted result.  The idea is to not
interrupt the editing session to view the result.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Boyd Roberts]

From: <rog@vitanuova.com>
> ... that way i can concentrate
> on the content of the text i'm creating without being
> distracted by occasional display glitches.

jesus, display glitches?  what are you talking about?

i want the bits on the page, just like i told it too.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

rog@vitanuova.com wrote:
> i remember ages ago reading in a paper about somebody
> (on the Blit?) doing that.

Yeah, it was fairly common for us Blit-family users.

> personally, i think it's quite nice *not* to have the visual
> feedback all the time - that way i can concentrate
> on the content of the text i'm creating without being
> distracted by occasional display glitches.

Note that i suggested it should occur only when one has
just written out the editor buffer.  Usually I do this
only at fairly well-defined stages of completion, which
is a natural time to have the result presented for
inspection.

Also, you can ignore the refresh going on in another
window.  Many people have stuff going on in other windows
that the one they're currently focussed on.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[david presotto]

With the loop I sent, I just hit newline in the window every time
I want to see a new copy of the layedout document.  It's not
automatic, just easy.  Of course with the speed of processors these
days, Doug's suggestion of just doing it when the file changes is
fine by me.  The other window is usually covered up anyways.

Rob was working on a much nicer WYSISYG editor that put out
a tagged file.  Perhaps he'll get back to it in the near future.
----- Original Message -----
From: Douglas A. Gwyn <DAGwyn@null.net>
To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 4:54 AM
Subject: Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)


> rog@vitanuova.com wrote:
> > i remember ages ago reading in a paper about somebody
> > (on the Blit?) doing that.
>
> Yeah, it was fairly common for us Blit-family users.
>
> > personally, i think it's quite nice *not* to have the visual
> > feedback all the time - that way i can concentrate
> > on the content of the text i'm creating without being
> > distracted by occasional display glitches.
>
> Note that i suggested it should occur only when one has
> just written out the editor buffer.  Usually I do this
> only at fairly well-defined stages of completion, which
> is a natural time to have the result presented for
> inspection.
>
> Also, you can ignore the refresh going on in another
> window.  Many people have stuff going on in other windows
> that the one they're currently focussed on.
>

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[jmk]

Please, lighten up. There's no point in raking over this stuff again
and again. All architectures have had their missteps, even the venerable
PDP-11. As Phil Winterbottom said when Ken Thompson was bemoaning
the demise of Mips Technologies and the coming age of all the world's a
386 - they won, we lost, get over it.

IA32 'superservers' can address >4GB of PHYSICAL memory due to page-table
extensions, it's nothing to do with segmentation and doesn't need to be
written in assembler.

On Fri Jul 13 12:21:25 EDT 2001, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 03:26:08PM +0000, Douglas A. Gwyn wrote:
> >
> > Lucio De Re wrote:
> > > No more than from Intel (they are to be blamed for CP/M, too),
> > > overlooking the fact that their address bus was wider than the
> > > register size, or scrapping the i860/i960 developments.
> > > They are rushed decisions that can't be reversed.  ...
> >
> > Even the original PDP-11 had a wider address bus than its
> > register (word) size.  It wasn't a "rushed decision", although
> > in the long run it caused enough trouble that a whole new
> > architecture was designed to replace it.
>
> Do you mean to tell me that DEC had a segmented architecture, with
> haphazard default "base" registers, a LOCK instruction to lock the
> bus for the following fetch cycle (whatever for? even the Univac
> 1106 had the more sane test-and-set) and a faulty MOV SS,XX that
> did _not_ lock the bus for the following MOV SP,YY as was the
> intention?
>
> I bet the 20-bit address was an oversight, one that is still being
> dragged along in this era of 64-bit registers.  For heaven's sake,
> Intel's marketing hype was full of praise for the ability to have
> 2^12 (overlapping) segments, and to this day the Pentium has segment
> registers.  Worse, one reads of superservers addressing up to
> 64Gigabytes of main memory - must be programmed in assembler 'cause
> it's a long time since I've seen a compiler capable of producing
> segmented architecture code.
>
> > architecture was designed to replace it.
>
> No, not to "replace it", but to propagate it.
>
> ++L

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote:
> ... As Phil Winterbottom said when Ken Thompson was bemoaning
> the demise of Mips Technologies and the coming age of all the world's a
> 386 - they won, we lost, get over it.

It's more, "everybody lost; get used to it".
I hope there are people who think it's worth working
toward a better future.

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[Rick Hohensee]

>
> jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote:
> > ... As Phil Winterbottom said when Ken Thompson was bemoaning
> > the demise of Mips Technologies and the coming age of all the world's a
> > 386 - they won, we lost, get over it.
>
> It's more, "everybody lost; get used to it".
> I hope there are people who think it's worth working
> toward a better future.
>

Next saturday a guy is supposed to demo his card that's some kind of video
switcher that uses his FPGA that is a 3-stack machine at the Maryland
Forth Interest Group meeting. Forth with a stack of index registers more
or less. There's lots of such things going on. My 3-stack-with-size-register
system only exists as software, unfortunately. There's never been a
true-multi-user Forth system in hardware or software. That should change
soon. Expect to see hardware protected memory but no virtual memory. And
perhaps hundreds of task-engines on a chip. New process, new CPU, same
bus.

Rick Hohensee
		www.clienux.com

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[rog]

> Rob was working on a much nicer WYSISYG editor

WYSISYG? is that like WYSISOWYG?

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[suspect]

Maybe WYSI(K)WYG. Apparently what I see on 9fans is (Kinda) related to
Plan9. maybe not.


On Mon, 16 Jul 2001 rog@vitanuova.com wrote:

> > Rob was working on a much nicer WYSISYG editor
>
> WYSISYG? is that like WYSISOWYG?
>
>

Re: [9fans] how people learn things (was architectures)

[David Gordon Hogan]

> There's never been a
> true-multi-user Forth system in hardware or software. That should change
> soon. Expect to see hardware protected memory but no virtual memory. And
> perhaps hundreds of task-engines on a chip. New process, new CPU, same
> bus.

Gee, I can hardly contain myself.