From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 5183 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2020 23:24:34 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 8 Nov 2020 23:24:34 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 210509D5BA; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 09:24:31 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2CBF9D56C; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 09:23:54 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=algebras-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@algebras-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="s0Yq0FKU"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 561049D570; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 09:23:50 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-lj1-f174.google.com (mail-lj1-f174.google.com [209.85.208.174]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 672579D56B for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 09:23:48 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-lj1-f174.google.com with SMTP id l10so8091299lji.4 for ; Sun, 08 Nov 2020 15:23:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=algebras-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=67mzJIAH7Vn4jC5sEUAW93NCxU8gHmFZYvIF9VTEo5o=; b=s0Yq0FKU14KQ6IQnrQ3c+zZKif7Ek5m+FG/qeebUy67eajE5f17hyuvSwDklIA5xZx LiOX+CFmzMA31YL3OL8fgwXLopdPR1kKqrtv+e3lFp926OcNpVXuoAnBbsKs2h6R3xwc 3otYntv1AyQRuY2aZViV8uN/7ZOpMT4jaBoaJp8QDoXJlknBsZ7YCCFLlPfinNoxnMP7 74vS3d0d1hMcjO8foQmqLZcO3T7877hQ0p3WIIHehu1+qYLgZFF2EYTN8kJSDCkamwV0 lhx2+ZoeeWuxig4wRrCVPA769r85EVyHuoy9G52fy+H1iNa+mN5It+SyxaJhSrb8r/O+ 8mPQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=67mzJIAH7Vn4jC5sEUAW93NCxU8gHmFZYvIF9VTEo5o=; b=R+7kJHUzVztsmAVAF4N5UkS/QUu6LVRUTkTgiEzt2k/svOml7EMOnYNOszZKoMePrj pct2bn5k10/IgzMlv4BWIK2qhVzVB6Ayu9VjEqHXNugbfzAy1fZoXteXd32B2yOF6gQK uG+JSoK6mfGP9+TKm1adxT50kwu+fIqhcz5JcRVLVgSOGGzbNhGnyNoHOW/Hs45qjH4p Q0ra8n7s/Tg3ilzCbslANWP1GON8E0JS0n5iJjuenlLB3bc2gN4++DRCb9v7EyCSdi9A Ae3V8fFIz4KDII/h1AEl8TGV7ivvrcavaV+6pH7LYW3na4p/QqaQrwGccx48sl+7cbRN t3Cw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533tPzaTwT9tW8+rCP4la7Yz6f2nuW1NSeqkk4lz9uZ+DPt2tGA4 QbEUDlPUERaRLpDZZDB5ifk39lIOMMlObQHrUI4zzQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzZNJhTlsRtAfHFDZzJTI4RgnH4LOOTV3puA2rb7CBdcQFBmQSHOs8oX41UrE91bU0WMplLybb+PbD/giEFnD0= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8654:: with SMTP id i20mr4697556ljj.343.1604877826508; Sun, 08 Nov 2020 15:23:46 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201106014109.GP26296@mcvoy.com> <20201106063725.GB99027@eureka.lemis.com> <20201106150609.GR26296@mcvoy.com> <20201106222302.GG26411@mcvoy.com> In-Reply-To: From: George Michaelson Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 09:23:35 +1000 Message-ID: To: Computer Old Farts Followers Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [TUHS] The Elements Of Style: UNIX As Literature X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" A lot of industrial design is based on inheritance. The nitrocellulose filmstock was nominal 40mm, after cutting and sprockets it was 35. cut it in half you have 16mm single sprocket. Original manufacture was 80 wide cut in half so undo that and you get 70mm. run the film sideways, you now have 700 high for IMAX dimensions. Why was nitrocellulose film stock coming in 80mm wide strips? Ask somebody who knows what George Eastman was doing at the time... My guess is the tank emitted 100mm but the edges were crinkly, and 80mm was what he got after slicing ragged margins. The rest is inheritance down the stack working on 1/2 and 1/4 sizing consequences. IBM was business machines. tabulators. The sheet stock it used for things in business was defined by what it could source coming in, reliably. The US census used hollerith cards, this is probably why the fed reserve used hollerith cards. (My G/F got a 1978 tax cheque refund from a camp school in the midwest on a hollerith-card-cheque, the last time I saw one in anger outside of the computer labs where we were still using them in anger, very anger) the Banks first atm's used card stock for receipts. they were mini-hollerith. I imagine because they understood how to do alignment from a cut corner, and had machinery which worked. I was told that fmt/72 is a post-hoc rationalisation to allow for 4-5 levels of indentation in >>>quoting. I think this is a post-hoc rationalisation of a prompter hoc reality. If you go back into teletype deep history, I bet you find 40/60/72 was coming out of some combination of fixed-width typeface, mechanics, and paper stock sizes available in the supply chain. (Mike Lesk told me the TBL offset in the T/ROFF box drawing was because of a highly specific throwback effect in the printer at Bell. The code was adjusted to deal with this, and the rest of us had to wear the top and bottom lines being misplaced without a patch to the code. This kind of thing, its classic "because we could, and because it works" decision logic) On Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 10:17 AM Dave Horsfall wrote: > > [ Moving to COFF (if your MUA respects "Reply-To:") ] > > On Fri, 6 Nov 2020, Larry McVoy wrote: > > > But I'm pretty old school, I write in C, I debug a lot with printf and > > asserts, I'm kind of a dinosaur. > > You've never experienced the joy of having your code suddenly working when > inserting printf() statements? Oh dear; time to break out GDB... > > -- Dave