elch

Prices are not an issue for Switzerland, given that the tariff on pork from Germany, for example, is 347 CHF per 100 kg.

Latin was the standard language of the Roman-Catholic Mass until the Second Vatican Council in the 1960s. The current form of the Mass in national languages was formalized in 1970.

Agreed! Thanks for the comments.

But does it really matter what the details were? The most important thing is that the standard published in 1963 was 7-bit. I mentioned that the 1963 version did not include lowercase letters. The (unpublished) 1965 version, mentioned on the first scan page, did.

As for the name, the acronym ASCII comes from the 1963 version (American Standard Code for Information Interchange). Later in 1966, ASA became USASI, and the official name was changed to USASCII, with ASCII as an acceptable alternative abbreviation. Later still, in 1969, USASI changed its name once again to ANSI, and an attempt was made to rename it ANSCII, but this did not catch on, and ASCII returned as the official name.

As for this 8-bit extension (not seven-bit code proposed by the ISO), perhaps they were referring to ECMA-35, the first version of which was published in December 1971? Or perhaps other proposals mentioned in the brief history. Of course, it seems that ASCII - regardless of the version - served as the basis for these extensions.

https://ecma-international.org/wp-content/uploads/ECMA-35_1s...

In general, I agree with your conclusions. However, I found it interesting that this document made no mention of ASCII or other 7-bit character sets. Especially since the first version of the standard (X3.4-1963, no lowercase) was already several years old at that point.

https://www.sensitiveresearch.com/Archive/CharCodeHist/X3.4-...

In this document [1] dated 1967-68, on page 8, IBM mention 8-bit character sets only: their EBCDIC and the "8-bit extension of the 7-bit code" proposed by ISO.

Because eight rather than six bits are used to represent a. character, up to 256 possible characters could be represented in the Extended Binary Coded Decimal Interchange Code (EBCDIC) shown in Figure 7. Except for certain teleprocessing equipment, the code that makes use of characters is either EBCDIC or an eight-bit extension of a seven-bit code proposed by the International Standards Organization.

[1] http://bitsavers.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/pdf/ibm/360/GC2...

That's not the only reason. On-screen keyboards take up valuable screen space.

IIRC PDP-11 was a 16 bit word machine with an 8-bit byte. Maybe you remember PDP-10 with 4x9=36 bit words?

If you don't like JIT/JVM there's GraalVM Native Image.

https://www.graalvm.org/latest/reference-manual/native-image...

In the past you could use e.g. Excelsior JET.

No, AFAIK the author is German and his nickname is stein (stone).

No, the author isn't an "OpenBSD person".

It's 4G just like the others:

16GB RAM (4GB+Up to 12GB Extended RAM)

Does it boot from the card? Is there an installation guide available somewhere?

What about registration plates? Do they make you feeling like a slave?

I am sure that they use MacBook Neo for development. /s

How about running many tasks on the machine at the same time?

How is "performance" defined? Does it take into account the amount of memory required in each case?

Lines aren't too long. They look great on all my devices.

Use ⌘ + + until you get the line length you like.

Thanks!

Any reference to the biggest issues with Go in your opinion, and what are you comparing it to?

I get 429s all the time trying to read this site in lynx or any non-mainstream browser (w/o JS).

Debian is using this upstream repository for nvi and UTF-8 is supported.

https://repo.or.cz/nvi.git

Those are not terminal shortcuts. They are program shortcuts. E.g. bash supports Emacs command line editing shortcuts using GNU Readline library. But the library (and bash) support vi mode editing too. POSIX sh(1) specifies vi-mode command line editing only.

That's why it's so complicated, and has left and right parentheses commands. You start out with a clean concept and then sort of accrete guano. It lands on you and sticks and you can't do anything about it really.

But of course he was wrong about 1991-2026:

The days of non-raster stuff are numbered, though sheer momentum will carry it to the end of the decade.

And about AT&T as the same year (1984) they introduced BLIT terminal:

The fundamental tension in UNIX that I think AT&T doesn't understand is that everyone is going to have a bitmap.

https://youtu.be/Pr1XXvSaVUQ

Windows: Settings -> Accessibility -> Always show scrollbars.

All .de domains are down for me.

To clarify, I do agree with you that C and C++ have been two distinct languages for a very long time. And C++ doesn’t have much in common with POSIX.

What I disagree with is the idea that C++ was developed completely independently of C (and Unix) - it originated at Bell Labs and was initially just an extension of C with classes. If you looked at the document I linked to, you would see that Bjarne Stroustrup thanks Dennis Ritchie in it for being a source of good ideas and useful problems. I don’t think I need to explain who Dennis Ritchie was for C and Unix.

As for the third example, note that the programs discussed here (arguably TUI) are unlikely to work on this type of terminal. Unless the program has a built-in mode that allows it to run in true command-line mode (arguably CLI). Just like vi/ex.

Of course, these were just examples to show that a computer terminal didn’t have to - and doesn’t have to - be like a VT100 or similar. And I realize that nowadays, when we hear the word "terminal," we tend to think of something like a VT100. Especially since the Linux (kernel) includes emulation for something like that.

However, historically, the first devices to be called computer terminals (and to enable interactive operation) were typewriters and teletypes. That is why one of the names given to newer CRT terminals was "glass teletypes." To distinguish these terminals from their predecessors, they were also referred as video terminals (VT) or video display units (VDU) etc.

Note that in addition to built-in VT102/VT220 emulation, xterm also includes built-in Tektronix 4014 emulation, which, to use your terminology, is a graphics terminal.

But on the topic, IMHO those "text terminals" represent the lowest common denominator, and using them as a user interface causes the least friction compared to true GUIs. For example, after booting Linux, I can basically start using those TUI programs right away without having to install or configure a graphical environment (X11 or Wayland). Remote computing also causes less friction and can essentially be used out of the box.

And TUI programs, like GUI programs, also make it easier and faster to explore compared to programs that run exclusively in CLI mode.

Personally I regret that Plan9-style computing and Oberon/ACME user interfaces didn’t become mainstream...

Real UNIX terminal:

https://youtu.be/Pr1XXvSaVUQ

Also terminal:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gUd8yVZ2kA

Terminal:

https://youtu.be/frMwsDTjmAs?t=493

In the case of 3.11 'winget install python.python.3.11' works just fine (Community Repository).