Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

AppJet Offers Browser-Based Coding How-To, Hosting

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the talk-about-rapid dept.

Programming 63

theodp writes "Know someone who wants to learn to program? Paul Graham advises programmer wannabes to check out The Absolute Beginner's Guide to Programming on the Web from AppJet, which aims to be 'the funnest and easiest way for a beginner to get started programming.' Setting the guide apart from other tutorials is the ability to edit and run any of the all-Javascript examples directly in your browser. Newcomers to programming and experienced developers alike can also publish their AppJet creations on the web. Sure beats GE BASIC on the General Electric Time-Sharing Service!"

cancel ×

63 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Now you can build your own Idle section (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24848667)

And by that I mean a site that no one wants to read or see again.

by "funnest" (5, Funny)

crenshawsgc (1228894) | more than 5 years ago | (#24848771)

When they say "funnest" I assume they mean "most fun," correct? I'm not a programmer but from what I understand, proper syntax can be important. When the site designers have gotten a better grasp of the English language, I'll trust their programming advice.

Re:by "funnest" (2, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 5 years ago | (#24848801)

Computer programmers are the sort of people who come up with their own language.... and sometimes implement it. It is not about correct spelling and grammar just consistent spelling and grammar.

Re:by "funnest" (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24849011)

Actually, the majority of them are the ones who have to abide by the syntax of an existing language.

Re:by "funnest" (3, Funny)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849227)

Well most languages have a small set of fixed syntax and a wider set of custom made syntaxes.

Remember the old joke about the programmer having trouble getting his code to compile, and some guy (a non-programmer) looks at it quickly and proudly proclaims "Oh, I see the problem. You spelled studio wrong."

Re:by "funnest" (3, Funny)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849291)

Actually, the majority of them are the ones who have to abide by the syntax of an existing language.

Unless you happen to be Guido van Rossum. In which case, you don't even have to abide by the syntax of your OWN language! :-P

(Note to humorless, Python programming mods: Guido is my personal hero and Python is my favorite interpreted language. Really.)

Re:by "funnest" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24848807)

Well it's funner than all the others.

Re:by "funnest" (1)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849159)

Hey, these people know what they are talking about.
I mean I don't see you with a Fungineering degree.

Re:by "funnest" (1)

Malevolyn (776946) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849247)

I left work today before the schedule was posted, but for we whalers on the moon need to come in this weekend?

Re:by "funnest" (1)

Malevolyn (776946) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849277)

I mean do! DO we have to come in this weekend?

That's what I get for dropping out of the Fungineering program are Mars University.

Re:by "funnest" (2)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849435)

You are succeeded in failing again.

Re:by "funnest" (1)

lysergic.acid (845423) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849335)

what do molds and mushrooms have to do with anything?

Re:by "funnest" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24849303)

"hot, hotter, hottest"

consonant-vowel-consonant

Care to give an actual rule as to why "funner" is improper but "hotter" is proper? What's that? There is no rule? Well, I guess these programmers haven't done anything to deserve the wrath of a failed grammar Nazi then.

Re:by "funnest" (4, Informative)

lysergic.acid (845423) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849469)

i had no idea that "funnest" wasn't a word.

actually, i'm still not quite sure. a search on reference.com [reference.com] yields:

No results found for funnest.
Did you mean funnest (in dictionary) or Fingest (in encyclopedia)?

Dictionary suggestions:
funnest
fun nest
fun-nest
funniest
...

i'll just go with funniest.

Re:by "funnest" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24852231)

Both forms are acceptable.

Re:by "funnest" (1)

daveime (1253762) | more than 5 years ago | (#24857115)

Especially if your an American who feels it's okay to bastardize the language instead of speaking it correctly :-(

Ouch, is my humoUr a bit too dry for my overseas neighboUrs ?

Re:by "funnest" (1)

atraintocry (1183485) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861587)

Your what does what to an American?

Re:by "funnest" (1)

aiba (628946) | more than 5 years ago | (#24937123)

I am the author of the front page of the guide, and I chose the word "funnest".
It should be noted that "funnest" currently appears on the front page of apple.com. "The funnest ipod ever".
I stand by my word choice and reject your dogmatic adherence to pedantic and schoolmarmish rules.

Nice to see AppJet featured (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24848783)

Been using AppJet for a while (I was among the earliest members) and I'm really glad to see them featured. AppJet's founders have done a wonderful job creating an easy to use and powerful language. They consistently communicate with their community (they offer personalized help in the forums), and have been creating new features and aspects of AppJet right from the beginning. However, be warned: AppJet really is a beta, and there are occasionally bugs. They're rectified very quickly however. I highly recommend AppJet.

Language (2, Informative)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861917)

AppJet's founders have done a wonderful job creating an easy to use and powerful language.

The language is JavaScript. AppJet's founders did not create it. They provide a hosting environment and some libraries.

How true is this? (3, Interesting)

Arkitus (1089627) | more than 5 years ago | (#24848839)

From the intoduction page: [appjet.com] "JavaScript is the most prevalent programming language in the world". Something tells me this ain't true... Aren't we getting a little carried away with Javascript?

Re:How true is this? (2, Insightful)

jhouserizer (616566) | more than 5 years ago | (#24848917)

Depends on what you mean by prevalent. Most commonly used? Most people with knowledge of it? Most lines of code written in it? Most platforms that support it? My guess is they mean most prevalent in the sense that it is very likely to be supported/usable on virtually any computer you sit in front of.

Re:How true is this? (1)

Thiez (1281866) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849509)

I guess C still wins. I bet your computer runs C code all the time. There is a C compiler for just about any device that can add two numbers. Many people know C and, in my opinion, it is worth knowing.

I'd like to see the number of lines of code written in C compared to Javascript.

C, more or less prevalent than javascript? A no-brainer.

Having said that, the website is about programming on the web, and in that context, javascript is pretty prevalent.

Re:How true is this? (1)

Dragonslicer (991472) | more than 5 years ago | (#24850125)

I guess C still wins. I bet your computer runs C code all the time.

My computer usually runs compiled executables, but if you want to compile every time you run a program, more power to you.

Re:How true is this? (1)

Thiez (1281866) | more than 5 years ago | (#24850695)

Aye, and my C-compiler is written in javascript B-)

Seriously though, what I meant with 'C code' was 'executable stuff, the source code of which was written in C'. Perhaps I should have been more clear (although, being blessed with great powers of denial and self-deception, I prefer to think that you are an idiot for not understanding).

Re:How true is this? (1)

HughsOnFirst (174255) | more than 5 years ago | (#24850619)

There is a C compiler for just about any device that can add two numbers.

I'd love to see a C compiler for a Curta. And not just because it would have a cute name when said aloud

Re:How true is this? (1)

afabbro (33948) | more than 5 years ago | (#24852161)

I guess C still wins.

You could make a plausible argument for Java - there are far more people with phones than computers. Indeed, SMS is the most widely used application in the world.

Or if you want to go by transactions, then it's unquestionably COBOL.

Re:How true is this? (1)

NNKK (218503) | more than 5 years ago | (#24869645)

Wouldn't most/all of those phones have C underneath the Java?

Re:How true is this? (1)

Kent Recal (714863) | more than 5 years ago | (#24851941)

Same would be true for C or assembler?

Example code (0, Redundant)

qoncept (599709) | more than 5 years ago | (#24848933)

Setting the guide apart from other tutorials is the ability to edit and run any of the all-Javascript examples directly in your browser.

Am I reading this correctly or does this book actually include example code?! How revolutionary!

Set apart from? (5, Informative)

ah.clem (147626) | more than 5 years ago | (#24848971)

http://www.w3schools.com/ [w3schools.com] - I use this site to get undergrads up to speed with the programming we do in our shop at the university. It's always worked well, and all the code is runnable in the browser. Pretty good info, too.

ah.clem

Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (4, Insightful)

pla (258480) | more than 5 years ago | (#24848975)

Another way to find images for your web app is using Google Image Search. When you search for an image and click on a result, you can also click on the "See full-size image" link at the top of the page. This will take you directly to the image in your browser, and you can copy the URL from the browser's location bar, and use that with AppJet's image command.

So by the third page, they already have you stealing bandwidth by deep-linking images?

Cool site, but I really hope they have a section on netiquette somewhere in there...

Re:Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (3, Insightful)

pla (258480) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849029)

D'oh! Okay, before you all smack me down, they do indeed mention that as unkosher. Somehow I completely missed that paragraph on my first read.

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa...

Re:Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (1)

daeg (828071) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849087)

A Slashdot reader missing entire sections of an article? Unpossible!

Re:Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (1)

Zadaz (950521) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849231)

A Slashdot reader missing entire sections of an article? Unpossible!

It's only unpossible because the typical reader misses the entire article to begin with. Missing individual parts of an article takes dedication.

Re:Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24850033)

I'm sure there's a perfectly cromulent reason for it.

Re:Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (2, Funny)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849355)

Go ahead and do it with my site. In fact I enjoy the thought of people linking to my images as they don't realise that people viewing my images from outside of my domain see pics of old man sex and old men with a poo fetish.

Re:Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24849819)

Just because he has his fist up McLame's ass doesn't make Cheney a poo fetishist.

fist THIS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24850021)

Just because he has his fist up McLame's ass doesn't make Cheney a poo fetishist.

Normally, it would make him a ventriloquist, but with this being politics.....

Re:Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (3, Interesting)

lysergic.acid (845423) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849875)

or how about this. if you don't want your images indexed by Google, add 2 short lines in robots.txt:
User-agent: Googlebot-Image
Disallow: /images/

i imagine most webmasters don't mind if someone links to one of their hosted images in a forum post or saves it to their hard drive for personal use. it's only a problem when:
a.) the hotlink is made from a site like /. which generates huge volumes of traffic.
b.) the image is being used for commercial purposes.
c.) the webmaster is a douche.

if you're a douche, please don't pollute the google image search results with links to your site. google image search provides a useful service to people looking for images online, and also to webmasters who gain traffic from the search results. if this isn't a fair trade to you, then it's very easy to tell google not to index your site (or just particular sections of your site).

now, some people have very limited bandwidth, so they may want to share their images, but don't want hotlinks. this is very understandable. and most of these webmasters know to prevent outside referrals to images by configuring their web server with the right access rules.

but if everyone acted like a bunch of tightwads, then Google Image Search would be completely useless. frankly, i'd rather people hotlink images directly from my server for forum posts than to to use a throwaway image host like PhotoBucket and thus contribute to the sea of dead images that you see on internet message boards.

Re:Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (1)

kat_skan (5219) | more than 5 years ago | (#24851769)

Okay, so if you'll indulge me for a moment, I want to make sure I'm not mis-characterizing your position here. You're saying that being annoyed that someone not only decided to use my images without so much as asking permission, but actually went so far as to make me pay for the bandwidth (however minuscule) is being a douche?

More power to you if you don't mind and even prefer that people hotlink your images, but who are you to berate people who can't or even just don't want to do the same? Why is not wanting my bandwidth quota used to support somebody else's site unreasonable? And why should I exclude myself from Google's image search just for that?

Re:Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (1)

lysergic.acid (845423) | more than 5 years ago | (#24852109)

other people's action don't define you as a douche. your own actions/choices do.

there are instances when hotlinking is inappropriate. but if everyone were so needlessly selfish and petty, then such useful services as Google Image Search (and the internet to a large degree) would be completely useless.

there are certain images that you may not want people using at all. that is fine. don't give people public access to those images. and if you don't agree to the trade-offs of being indexed by services such as Google Image Search, then you should keep your site out of the index. Google Image Search is meant to provide a public service while simultaneously giving webmasters the benefit of increased exposure. if you don't want to share your images, then why have your site listed amongst the search results?

if you only want to benefit from a particular service/resource but are unwilling to make any contributions to it, then yes, i would say that classifies you as a douche.

Re:Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (1)

kat_skan (5219) | more than 5 years ago | (#24852579)

I really don't see how being indexed by Google implies carte blanche for anyone to use your content in any context they choose without restriction, aside from the frankly completely arbitrary one precluding commercial use. Would you say the same is true of anything I might publish? If I write a story, is it okay to reprint it wherever you like without so much as an attribution, so long as you don't charge anything?

Where do you draw the line? If I write a program and depend on Google to direct customers to it, is it okay for one of them to distribute copies of it? I'm benefiting—in fact commercially benefiting—from the service, but not making any contribution to it there, either.

What about my Gmail? I benefit from that exclusively, and give nothing to them in return. I read it by IMAP, so I don't even see the ads. Is it okay for Google to publish my email? Is it okay if they don't benefit commercially?

Re:Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (1)

lysergic.acid (845423) | more than 5 years ago | (#24853487)

as i've already stated. google image search only works if site-owners agree to share their images.

this has nothing to do with gmail. gmail's usefulness to the general public has nothing to do with user contribution. google's gmail service doesn't cease to be useful just because you (or everyone) uses IMAP. their publishing user emails wouldn't make the service more useful either. that's a completely random and nonsensical analogy.

and i would advise you to research the concept of 'fair use', which i think is relevant to this discussion, rather than pursuing orthogonal comparisons.

if you want to extrapolate my argument to written works then consider the Google Web Search service. in order for the search results to be useful, google has to display excerpts from listed web pages in the returned search results. most people consider this to fall within fair use. the service helps users find information more easily on the web, and also increases the amount of traffic to listed websites.

this search service only works, however, if:
a.) webmasters allow google to grab select portions of the site's written content and display it along with the search results.
b.) the site doesn't serve different versions of a page to google and other visitors.

if these terms aren't fair to you, then you shouldn't have your site indexed by google. and some people don't--or at least don't have some parts of their site indexed.

now, if you only want the benefit of search engine traffic but don't want people to see any part of your site's content without having paid for it first, then you are a douche. and you should be delisted. because if every site had such policies, then google's web search would cease to work.

also, let's not confuse legal rights with net etiquette. it is perfectly within your legal rights to be a douche. but that doesn't mean people can't call you out on your douche-like behavior.

Re:Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (1)

kat_skan (5219) | more than 5 years ago | (#24855593)

this has nothing to do with gmail. gmail's usefulness to the general public has nothing to do with user contribution. google's gmail service doesn't cease to be useful just because you (or everyone) uses IMAP. their publishing user emails wouldn't make the service more useful either. that's a completely random and nonsensical analogy.

Obviously it wouldn't. But hotlinking material found on Image Search doesn't make Image Search more useful, either. That's just something inconsiderate people with a sense of entitlement do with the images they find. Likewise, privacy aspects aside, Google publishing my email would be a liberty taken with my writing that they are not entitled to.

and i would advise you to research the concept of 'fair use', which i think is relevant to this discussion, rather than pursuing orthogonal comparisons.

Okay, what specific material would you like to suggest? Since you're interested in only the ethical sense of the term, and not its actual definition in copyright law, and since your interpretation clearly extends far beyond the uses that the U.S. Code allows for anyway, what do you consider the authoritative definition to be?

if you want to extrapolate my argument to written works then consider the Google Web Search service. in order for the search results to be useful, google has to display excerpts from listed web pages in the returned search results. most people consider this to fall within fair use. the service helps users find information more easily on the web, and also increases the amount of traffic to listed websites.

I'm afraid I don't follow you. I don't see how Google displaying a dozen words from the page in the search results is anything at all like hotlinking an image. One is a small excerpt from the work as a whole, and one is the wholesale replication of the entire work elsewhere. Do you really consider these to be equivalent?

this search service only works, however, if:
a.) webmasters allow google to grab select portions of the site's written content and display it along with the search results.
b.) the site doesn't serve different versions of a page to google and other visitors.

I don't believe I ever suggested that point A was untrue. In fact, that falls under fair use as I am familiar with the concept. I certainly didn't propose point B, as I have prescribed no countermeasures against this activity of any sort.

now, if you only want the benefit of search engine traffic but don't want people to see any part of your site's content without having paid for it first, then you are a douche. and you should be delisted. because if every site had such policies, then google's web search would cease to work.

This also was not in any of the examples I asked about, but I'll ask now: are you seriously suggesting that it is immoral for a members-only website to be listed by Google?

Re:Cool idea, but one peeve so far... (1)

ReedYoung (1282222) | more than 5 years ago | (#24862901)

You are the douche!

now, if you only want the benefit of search engine traffic but don't want people to see any part of your site's content without having paid for it first, then you are a douche. and you should be delisted. because if every site had such policies, then google's web search would cease to work.

If I have content which customers will pay to access, I will charge them for it. If you do not, but believe you have some under development and therefore want to use the Internet for publicity, you have a good reason choose to offer your content free of charge (until you can concoct something profitable). But because you think that due to your lack of a revenue-generator, therefore everybody should refuse the profit you haven't figured out how to earn, you are the douche!

it is perfectly within your legal rights to be a douche. but that doesn't mean people can't call you out on your douche-like behavior.

Three words: Double-U Oh Double-U (1)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849079)

Setting the guide apart from other tutorials is the ability to edit and run any of the all-Javascript examples directly in your browser

Sounds tricky. I wonder how do dey do dat?

10 years on... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24849267)

USQ has been using in-browser editable JavaScript programs for engineering simulations since 1997. Some of the original ones can still be found at jollies.com [jollies.com] . (Though some haven't kept up with modern browsers). The name jollies is one of those artificially contrived acronyms.

Sorry but, (1)

zBoD (86938) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849647)

No, using a comma instead of "and" in a news title does NOT make it almost sound like serious journalism.

Sorry ;)

Re:Sorry but, (1)

theodp (442580) | more than 5 years ago | (#24851407)

But it does make it fit into the limited space of the headline text box. :-)

Does it teach the importance of good libraries? (3, Interesting)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 5 years ago | (#24849829)

I used to HATE getting into JavaScript before I found JQuery. When I first got into it, I converted a web app that had pages of DOM manipulation code into a series of small chunks of JQuery code. A conservative estimate is that JQuery eliminated 60% of the hand-written DOM manipulation code and such.

As a contrast, my wife works with a woman who didn't get to use any library, and had to code everything using just the base JavaScript APIs. After several months, she had a bloated beast that barely did anything because she had to implement so many things herself, rather than just making a few calls to JQuery here, or Prototype there.

Geleral Electric Tims-Sharing Systems (2)

celticgeek (1356201) | more than 5 years ago | (#24850065)

Holy Cow!!! I learned to program in GE BASIC on a General Electric Time-Sharing System, back in 1973. Holy Cow again!!!

Re:Geleral Electric Tims-Sharing Systems (2)

LMacG (118321) | more than 5 years ago | (#24850169)

Me too! </aol>

But it was 1968. And I was all set to go with the "insensitive clod" meme.

Ah memories . . . slamming the phone down into an acoustic coupler [wikipedia.org] , typing programs in on a model 33 Teletype [wikipedia.org] , saving them on yellow paper tape [wikipedia.org] . . .

Re: (1)

clint999 (1277046) | more than 5 years ago | (#24850601)

what do molds and mushrooms have to do with anything?

Eloquent Javascript (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24850873)

http://eloquentjavascript.net/

I really liked this one.

Heroku? (2, Insightful)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#24850921)

Not going to look into this in too much depth yet, but it sounds quite a lot like Heroku [heroku.com] -- only less beginner-oriented, and without trying to do server-side javascript.

Appjet is awesome (1)

Spy Hunter (317220) | more than 5 years ago | (#24852029)

AppJet is pretty cool. It's a great way to write a little one-off web app. You don't have to worry about installing anything, getting hosting, etc etc. You just type some code into the browser-based IDE and you're done.

My sig in AppJet. [appjet.net]

GE Basic (1)

mr_bandit (1356285) | more than 5 years ago | (#24852537)

Y'all gotta realize at the time, your choices were COBOL, FORTRAN, JCL, etc. The history is: In 1964 or 1965, the GE manager, Arnold Spielberg (you might have seen his son's movies) came back from a conference where he had seen BASIC. He realized this was a radical thing - a programming language a "normal" engineer or .. (shudder) .. a manager could write a program in - interactively. To that point, *everything* was batch. They first put it on a GE 250, and were the first folks to figure out the interactive job shop. Basically (all puns intended :^) they charged for resources - time, disc space, etc. They hired the students from Univ Chicago who had experience with BASIC. They paid them as consultants, ie about $200/day - they could not get the students to leave - the students were sleeping under their desks! This was the real start of command line shells and "real" interactive shells/languages. (My father was on the team, and I knew many of the other team members. The team went on to create CALL360, another radical OS, and the first SpectraPhysics UPC scanner.)

Re:GE Basic (1)

mr_bandit (1356285) | more than 5 years ago | (#24852707)

I got a couple of details wrong.

BASIC came from Dartmouth - brainfart.

BTW - my first programming experience was an ASR33 in our spare bedroom connected to the GE mainframe.

http://febcm.club.fr/english/gecos_to_gcos8_part_1.htm [febcm.club.fr]

"Mark-III and General Electric Information System

In 1964, GE had helped the Dartmouth College NH to develop an interactive system for teaching programming. The hardware was a GE-200 front-ended by a communication processor developed initially for store and forward communication messages the GE Datanet-30. The terminals were AT&T Teletype 33 ASCII typewriters connected through 300 bauds Bell modems.

The Dartmouth College, perhaps inspired from MIT CTSS, had developed a special purpose operating-system including an interpretive processor of the BASIC (Beginner's All Symbolic Instruction Code) language also created for this system, christened GE-265.

General Electric started to market the BASIC service, through a special division that took over the maintenance of the Dartmouth College software. As the hardware perspective of the GE-200 was limited, the Dartmouth College accepted the GE offer of porting the DTSS (Dartmouth Time-Sharing System) to the GE-600. GE started to replace its GE-265 by GE-635 as Mark-III systems.

The hardware of Mark-III system was originally completely standard, but the software was developed and maintained independently from Phoenix. General Electric Computer Division and its affiliates (e.g., Bull General-Electric) were not entitled to license their customers with Mark-III software.

Mark-III systems main center was concentrated in Cleveland OH, but expanded with a center in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. The customers of the timesharing service were connected transparently to the computer centers.

With Mark-III, the applications were expanded to email and batch applications. Eventually, GE added to the base systems several IBM 370 computers to provide batch services without recompiling applications to the peculiarities of GE-600 code (differences in scientific operations precision in particular.

GE ISD was later instrumental in the evolution of Honeywell Large Systems by pushing Phoenix to use IBM and IBM compatible peripheral subsystems on the DPS-8 product line. GEISD had developed since the early 70s their own versions of peripheral subsystems shared between Honeywell and IBM computers and pressured Honeywell to introduce a standard facility.

After acquisition of the GE computer business by Honeywell in 1970, General Electric kept the timesharing business in an Information Services Division that is still alive. The ISD European Operation was momentarily kept inside Honeywell-Bull, but was retroceded to GE circa 1975."

me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24854019)

http://oreillyschool.com has been doing this kind of thing for years.

W3C and GNU coding standards team froth rabidly (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24856743)

Tetris in /* appjet:version 0.1 */ [appjet.net]
page.setMode("plain");print(html("""Z=X=[B=A=12];function Y(){for(C
=[q=c=i=4];f=i--*K;c-=!Z[h+(K+6?p+K:C[i]=p*A-(p/9|0)*145)])p=B[i];for(c?0:K+6?h
+=K:t?B=C:0;i=K=q--;f+=Z[A+p])k=X[p=h+B[q]]=1;h+=A;if(f|B)for(Z=X,X=[l=228],B=[
[-7,-20,6,h=17,-9,3,3][t=++t%7]-4,0,1,t-6?-A:2];l--;)for(l%A?l-=l%A*!Z[l]:(P+=
k++,c=l+=A);--c>A;)Z[c]=Z[c-A];for(S="";i228
)?i%A?"â-":"â-
":"ï¼");D.innerHTML=S+P;Z[5]||setTimeout(Y,i-P)}Y(h=K=t=P=0)

I learned with GE Basic! (1)

5pp000 (873881) | more than 5 years ago | (#24862261)

You insensitive clod!

(Yes, really. It was 1969.)

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>