[COFF] Fwd: Old and Tradition was [TUHS] V9 shell

[sauer at technologists.com (Charles H Sauer)]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2348 bytes --]



On 2/12/2020 4:11 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 11:13 AM Clem Cole <clemc at ccc.com 
> <mailto:clemc at ccc.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>     On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 10:01 PM Larry McVoy <lm at mcvoy.com
>     <mailto:lm at mcvoy.com>> wrote:
> 
>         What little Fortran background I have suggests that the difference
>         might be mind set.  Fortran programmers are formally trained (at
>         least I
>         was, there was a whole semester devoted to this) in accumulated
>         errors.
>         You did a deep dive into how to code stuff so that the error was
>         reduced
>         each time instead of increased.  It has a lot to do with how
>         floating
>         point works, it's not exact like integers are. 
> 
>     Just a thought, but it might also be the training.   My Dad (a
>     mathematician and 'computer') passed a few years ago, I'd love to
>     have asked him.   But I suspect when he and his peeps were doing
>     this with a slide rule or at best an Friden mechanical adding
>     machine, they were acutely aware of how errors accumulated or not. 
>     When they started to convert their processes/techniques to Fortran
>     in the early 1960s, I agree with you that I think they were
>     conscious of what they were doing.   I'm not sure modern CS types
>     are taught the same things as what might be taught in a course being
>     run by a pure scientist who cares in the same way folks like our
>     mothers and fathers did in the 1950s and 60s.
> 
> 
> Most cs types barely know that 2.234 might not be an exact number when 
> converted to binary... A few, however can do sophisticated analysis on 
> the average ULP for complex functions over the expected range..

If that is true of some today, that is sad and disappointing. I think I 
was taught otherwise in my beginning C.S. course at UT-Austin in 1971.

If I recall correctly:
- all doctoral candidates ended up taking two semesters of numerical 
analysis. I still have two volume n.a. text in the attic (orange, but 
not "burnt orange", IIRC).
- numerical analysis was covered on the doctoral qualifying exam.

-- 
voice: +1.512.784.7526       e-mail: sauer at technologists.com
fax: +1.512.346.5240         Web: https://technologists.com/sauer/
Facebook/Google/Skype/Twitter: CharlesHSauer