Skip to main content

programming languages - the next thing

I've been a student of programming languages since I started programming in the early 80s. Back in those days there were only a handful of mainstream languages that were accessible. At first there were two computers to choose from. An Apple ][ or a Radio Shack TRS-80. Both included a ROM based BASIC interpreter.

Other compilers were available, Radio Shack had COBOL, Fortran, pascal compilers and and Assemblers. Apple had it's own toolchain, which I never experienced first hand but I recall my high school friends were writing programs in something other than 65x assembler.

When the IBM PC entered the space the tools changed again. Borland International started selling Turbo Pascal which turned into , Turbo C, Turbo C++, Turbo Assembler, Turbo Prolog, and so on. These tools were reasonable priced and were simply awesome. Soon after Microsoft entered into the tools war polluting the API at every turn but nothing beat Borland compilers.

Sometime in the middle of all that there was a tool fracture to the next level. dbase, clipper and later foxpro created an application development layer using macros and data instead of low level constructs of the languages that came early.

There was a whole classification of languages and tools that were out there... schools like MIT and companies like Bell Labs were in high gear producing more languages, operating systems, and general systems research.

Later, in college I was introduced to more and more languages. Ada was one language that I liked although it was time consuming to get my first program to run as there were so many compiler errors that had to be overcome. (review of Ada) I appreciate it eve more today because that strict immutable contract between programmer and other applications seems to be what we strive for now. And other than some basic syntax sugar it's no different than any other language. At the time we were talking about the potential of software proofs. Now it seems that proofs have given way to TDD and BDD with some natural language syntax.

How different things would be if we had stuck to a single syntax and merely added the features we needed.


Popular posts from this blog

Entry level cost for CoreOS+Tectonic

CoreOS and Tectonic start their pricing at 10 servers. Managed CoreOS starts at $1000 per month for those first 10 servers and Tectonic is $5000 for the same 10 servers. Annualized that is $85K or at least one employee depending on your market. As a single employee company I'd rather hire the employee. Specially since I only have 3 servers.

The pricing is biased toward the largest servers with the largest capacities; my dual core 32GB i5 IntelNuc can never be mistaken for a 96-CPU dual or quad core DELL

If CoreOS does not figure out a different barrier of entry they are going to follow the Borland path to obscurity.

UPDATE 2017-10-30: With gratitude the CoreOS team has provided updated information on their pricing, however, I stand by my conclusion that the effective cost is lower when you deploy monster machines. The cost per node of my 1 CPU Intel NUC is the same as a 96 CPU server when you get beyond 10 nodes. I'll also reiterate that while my pricing notes are not currently…

eGalax touch on default Ubuntu 14.04.2 LTS

I have not had success with the touch drivers as yet.  The touch works and evtest also seems to report events, however, I have noticed that the button click is not working and no matter what I do xinput refuses to configure the buttons correctly.  When I downgraded to ubuntu 10.04 LTS everything sort of worked... there must have been something in the kermel as 10.04 was in the 2.6 kernel and 4.04 is in the 3.x branch.

One thing ... all of the documentation pointed to the wrong website or one in Taiwanese. I was finally able to locate the drivers again: (it would have been nice if they provided the install instructions in text rather than PDF)
Please open the document "EETI_eGTouch_Programming_Guide" under the Guide directory, and follow the Guidline to install driver.
download the appropriate versionunzip the fileread the programming manual And from that I'm distilling to the following: execute the answer all of the questio…

Prometheus vs Bosun

In conclusion... while Bosun(B) is still not the ideal monitoring system neither is Prometheus(P).


I am running Bosun in a Docker container hosted on CoreOS. Fleet service/unit files keep it running. However in once case I have experienced at least one severe crash as a result of a disk full condition. That it is implemented as part golang, java and python is an annoyance. The MIT license is about the only good thing.

I am trying to integrate Prometheus into my pipeline but losing steam fast. The Prometheus design seems to desire that you integrate your own cache inside your application and then allow the server to scrape the data, however, if the interval between scrapes is shorter than the longest transient session of your application then you need a gateway. A place to shuttle your data that will be a little more persistent.

(1) storing the data in my application might get me started more quickly
(2) getting the server to pull the data might be more secure
(3) using a push g…