• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

WTB: Working Apple Lisa

Status
Not open for further replies.
You should make a video of using it. Could be interesting. I like the raspberry pi minis. I dont like the commercially released minis. Guess I like making stuff.
 
Svenska said:
But the real deal for me is that most of the code doesn't care about the hardware - and can be tested outside as well.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Most of my retro-programming is done in assembler, and being able to quickly unit test my individual routines in a simulator is absolutely invaluable; it's saved me, I'm sure, years of debugging time. (I also can write my unit tests in Python and pytest, which is extremely fast and convenient.)
 
Chuck(G) said:
Now, that's where we differ. I do retro-programming in assembly. Then I use an assembler to compile it to machine code.
Click to expand...
I have a vague sense of where you're coming from, but I don't really get it. Are you saying that "my retro-programming is done in assembler" is different from "I do retro-programming in assembly"? Or are you saying that one might assume that someone writing programs in assembly language is not then giving that source code to an assembler to produce machine language?
 
Hes saying any "assembler" compiles code... regardless of programming language. What you meant to say was you did it in Assembly.
 
It's "assembly language"; the "assembler" is the compiler that processes assembly language. It's akin to saying that you program in "C compiler" or "Javascript engine". Agent vs. object, basically.
Another nit, fortunately lost in the tides of time is the "I program in BAL" people. BAL - "IBM Basic Assembly Language"--is only applicable to the very lowest subset of S/360 assembly, usually encountered on the 360/20 or low-end 360/30 systems with 8K or so of memory. Saying that one programs in BAL on a 360/65 is utter nonsense.

Fortunately for the world, the people who say that they program in BAL are by and large, dead or otherwise age-impaired.
 
Chuck(G) said:
It's "assembly language"; the "assembler" is the compiler that processes assembly language.
Click to expand...
"Assembler language" is a widely accepted alternative term to "assembly language." Since you mention IBM, here's an example of them using the term. You can also find the term used in plenty of books that are written by academic computing scientists and professionally edited by reputable scientific publishers.

Don't worry, this still leaves you plenty to nitpick about. For example, another language you call "Javascript" is actually named "JavaScript."
 
cjs said:
"Assembler language" is a widely accepted alternative term to "assembly language." Since you mention IBM, here's an example of them using the term. You can also find the term used in plenty of books that are written by academic computing scientists and professionally edited by reputable scientific publishers.
Click to expand...
"Assembler language" isn't quite the same as "assembler". The former pertains to the language for a particular translation program; the latter is the program.

I consider Javascript v. JavaScript to be a stylistic typographical convention. It sounds the same no matter how it's spelled.

But then, I'm a fussbudget. :)
 
Chuck(G) said:
Now, that's where we differ. I do retro-programming in assembly. Then I use an assembler to compile it to machine code. :)
Click to expand...
Well, in many other languages (at least Swedish and German), "assembler" refers to both the language and the tool, and "assembly" is a rather new term related to the .net ecosystem. Sometimes, things bleed through no matter how hard one tries.

Alas, I am sad that everyone now refers to "notebook" as "laptops", even though they used to be very dissimilar beasts.
 
Chuck(G) said:
No qualification then, in either Swedish or German?
Click to expand...
Generally, no qualification. It can be added if necessary in both languages.

For German, see https://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/Assembler (1: the language; 2: the tool).
For Swedish, see https://svenska.se/tre/?sok=assembler (only SO lists the word at all, and only as the language); most sources list "assembler" first and "assemblerspråk" second. The tool can also be called "assemblerare" or "assemblator" (compiler is translated as "kompilator").
 
Well, considering that it's a US-origin term, I guess that it's understandable. I remember that the next time I have to program machine language in Swedish. :) langage d'assemblage.
 
Chuck(G) said:
"Assembler language" isn't quite the same as "assembler". The former pertains to the language for a particular translation program; the latter is the program.
Click to expand...
Well, the term I used then seems more accurate, since virtually all of the code I write is not written in (presumably generic) "assembly language" but in a particular "assembler language": that used by the Macroassembler AS. :)
 
falter said:
I wonder if anyone has written any books or articles on the psychology of ebay auctions. It's really interesting to observe how people behave there. Like you'll have a Lisa for example being offered at $4k Buy it Now, which they sell for almost all day long, and nobody will touch it.. but then an auction will fly up to $5k. It's like people get emotionally invested in an auction... they don't like seeing the cost up front.
Click to expand...
I watched a video by the 8-Bit guy who used to sell on Ebay (when he was known as the MacBook Guy). He said that he stopped doing auctions and moved solely to Buy It Now. He explained that auctions would fetch higher selling prices they also had significant no pays. He reasoned that, as you suggested, people got caught up / emotional while bidding and once the fervor wore off people realized they bid way too much.
 
oldpcguy said:
I watched a video by the 8-Bit guy who used to sell on Ebay (when he was known as the MacBook Guy). He said that he stopped doing auctions and moved solely to Buy It Now. He explained that auctions would fetch higher selling prices they also had significant no pays. He reasoned that, as you suggested, people got caught up / emotional while bidding and once the fervor wore off people realized they bid way too much.
Click to expand...
I've actually been the 'second chance' bidder in a few of those situations. There was one I remember where I bid a max of $2000 or something, and my bid held at $300 until the very end when the 'winner' nuked their bid and won at $2100 or something. The seller wanted me to purchase at $2000, and I declined. I figured if the other bidder was nonsense and nobody else bid, as had happened here, then the real winning bid should have been $300. I suggested he rerun the auction and I think it ended up going to something close to that price.

I hate those situations, especially this 'private bidder' nonsense which surely encourages shill bids. It makes you not trust what is going on. The only fix I guess is just to always snipe bid. Which kind of makes the whole auction process beforehand pointless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top