Nostalgia ain't what it used to be...
-
I posted yesterday[^] about someone trying to learn with archaic tools, and that lead to finding QuickC for Dos on an abandonware site. I used to love that program! And yes, it does run in DosBox. Good things: 1) It's quick. Compilation is slower than I remember: for a really tiny app it spends a lot of time linking. But it loads and unloads practically instantly, much, much faster than VS. 2) The help is miles better than VS. Put it like this: it works. It could use some clarification - for example
strcpydoesn't tell you which is the source and which the destination. 3) 16 bit integers! Bad things: 1) I'd forgotten how damn limited C is! And how long it takes to get anything done with standard libraries instead of a framework doing it all behind the scenes. I want my classes back! 2) Only 21 lines of code on screen at any one time, and only 80 chars wide. 3) Copy and Paste are the old style "CTRL+INS" and "SHIFT+INS" (I'd forgotten those, but they still work in Win7!) 4) Um. That's it. Perhaps I won't use it in anger again (I mean, when am I going to need a 16 bit application?) but it brings back a lot of memories - some of them good. Anyone else remember this one?Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt -
I posted yesterday[^] about someone trying to learn with archaic tools, and that lead to finding QuickC for Dos on an abandonware site. I used to love that program! And yes, it does run in DosBox. Good things: 1) It's quick. Compilation is slower than I remember: for a really tiny app it spends a lot of time linking. But it loads and unloads practically instantly, much, much faster than VS. 2) The help is miles better than VS. Put it like this: it works. It could use some clarification - for example
strcpydoesn't tell you which is the source and which the destination. 3) 16 bit integers! Bad things: 1) I'd forgotten how damn limited C is! And how long it takes to get anything done with standard libraries instead of a framework doing it all behind the scenes. I want my classes back! 2) Only 21 lines of code on screen at any one time, and only 80 chars wide. 3) Copy and Paste are the old style "CTRL+INS" and "SHIFT+INS" (I'd forgotten those, but they still work in Win7!) 4) Um. That's it. Perhaps I won't use it in anger again (I mean, when am I going to need a 16 bit application?) but it brings back a lot of memories - some of them good. Anyone else remember this one?Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
Loosing my control! Who's that someone? I had this on my mind yesterday, and today I am asking it!
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
-
Loosing my control! Who's that someone? I had this on my mind yesterday, and today I am asking it!
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
Not saying. Unfair to embarrass people! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
-
Not saying. Unfair to embarrass people! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
And not fair not telling people and creating a suspense! :D
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
-
I posted yesterday[^] about someone trying to learn with archaic tools, and that lead to finding QuickC for Dos on an abandonware site. I used to love that program! And yes, it does run in DosBox. Good things: 1) It's quick. Compilation is slower than I remember: for a really tiny app it spends a lot of time linking. But it loads and unloads practically instantly, much, much faster than VS. 2) The help is miles better than VS. Put it like this: it works. It could use some clarification - for example
strcpydoesn't tell you which is the source and which the destination. 3) 16 bit integers! Bad things: 1) I'd forgotten how damn limited C is! And how long it takes to get anything done with standard libraries instead of a framework doing it all behind the scenes. I want my classes back! 2) Only 21 lines of code on screen at any one time, and only 80 chars wide. 3) Copy and Paste are the old style "CTRL+INS" and "SHIFT+INS" (I'd forgotten those, but they still work in Win7!) 4) Um. That's it. Perhaps I won't use it in anger again (I mean, when am I going to need a 16 bit application?) but it brings back a lot of memories - some of them good. Anyone else remember this one?Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
Chris Duncan and I used to have discussions on how good Turbo was in the day, light years ahead of uSoft. Haven't seen any posts from him in a while, he must be busy.
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.0 There's a fine line between crazy and free spirited and it's usually a prescription. I'm currently unsupervised, I know it freaks me out too but the possibilities are endless.
-
I posted yesterday[^] about someone trying to learn with archaic tools, and that lead to finding QuickC for Dos on an abandonware site. I used to love that program! And yes, it does run in DosBox. Good things: 1) It's quick. Compilation is slower than I remember: for a really tiny app it spends a lot of time linking. But it loads and unloads practically instantly, much, much faster than VS. 2) The help is miles better than VS. Put it like this: it works. It could use some clarification - for example
strcpydoesn't tell you which is the source and which the destination. 3) 16 bit integers! Bad things: 1) I'd forgotten how damn limited C is! And how long it takes to get anything done with standard libraries instead of a framework doing it all behind the scenes. I want my classes back! 2) Only 21 lines of code on screen at any one time, and only 80 chars wide. 3) Copy and Paste are the old style "CTRL+INS" and "SHIFT+INS" (I'd forgotten those, but they still work in Win7!) 4) Um. That's it. Perhaps I won't use it in anger again (I mean, when am I going to need a 16 bit application?) but it brings back a lot of memories - some of them good. Anyone else remember this one?Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
I remember the days of QuickC. Remember memory models and choosing your stack size? After learning QuickBasic I felt like a real programmer learning QuickC. Anyway, why didn't you just use cc or gcc? They are supported on modern OSes, easier to get now and they allow you to create extremely small -- limited -- C programs using stdlib. Even RPi Rasbian As a matter of fact, cc is installed on RPi's Raspbian distribution and it is very easy to use to get basic "hello world" going. Just curious about why you didn't try gcc?
-
I remember the days of QuickC. Remember memory models and choosing your stack size? After learning QuickBasic I felt like a real programmer learning QuickC. Anyway, why didn't you just use cc or gcc? They are supported on modern OSes, easier to get now and they allow you to create extremely small -- limited -- C programs using stdlib. Even RPi Rasbian As a matter of fact, cc is installed on RPi's Raspbian distribution and it is very easy to use to get basic "hello world" going. Just curious about why you didn't try gcc?
Because QuickC was (possibly the first, certainly the first I met) integrated IDE: editor, compiler, and debugger in a single package, and that meant you didn't have to faff about switching apps and building make files. And the documentation was one (F1) key away! :-D Prior to QuickC I was using vi, and compiling C on unix... :~ Or EDLIN on PC. Ouch! Later I moved to Brief (the Programmers Editor) - which had a thicker manual than 123 and DOS put together! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
-
I posted yesterday[^] about someone trying to learn with archaic tools, and that lead to finding QuickC for Dos on an abandonware site. I used to love that program! And yes, it does run in DosBox. Good things: 1) It's quick. Compilation is slower than I remember: for a really tiny app it spends a lot of time linking. But it loads and unloads practically instantly, much, much faster than VS. 2) The help is miles better than VS. Put it like this: it works. It could use some clarification - for example
strcpydoesn't tell you which is the source and which the destination. 3) 16 bit integers! Bad things: 1) I'd forgotten how damn limited C is! And how long it takes to get anything done with standard libraries instead of a framework doing it all behind the scenes. I want my classes back! 2) Only 21 lines of code on screen at any one time, and only 80 chars wide. 3) Copy and Paste are the old style "CTRL+INS" and "SHIFT+INS" (I'd forgotten those, but they still work in Win7!) 4) Um. That's it. Perhaps I won't use it in anger again (I mean, when am I going to need a 16 bit application?) but it brings back a lot of memories - some of them good. Anyone else remember this one?Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
It is about our memory - I used to believe that C=64 was a supercomputer, until I run an emulator on my PC a few years ago... :((
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
"It never ceases to amaze me that a spacecraft launched in 1977 can be fixed remotely from Earth." ― Brian Cox
-
It is about our memory - I used to believe that C=64 was a supercomputer, until I run an emulator on my PC a few years ago... :((
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
I know what you mean. About thirty years ago, I was working on the VDT software for a Telecoms testing suite: there were four of us in the team doing the VDT, 10 or so doing the presentation stuff at the computer end (two mainframes: one DB, one test, with integration and control via the VDT), another dozen doing the hardware interfacing to the line test equipment. Gawd knows how many managers... And the company it was all going to work for got a suggestion from a test department employee who was fed up with the manual system. Suggesting that a ZX Spectrum could handle it pretty easily, and he had a boy who could write the code... :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt -
I know what you mean. About thirty years ago, I was working on the VDT software for a Telecoms testing suite: there were four of us in the team doing the VDT, 10 or so doing the presentation stuff at the computer end (two mainframes: one DB, one test, with integration and control via the VDT), another dozen doing the hardware interfacing to the line test equipment. Gawd knows how many managers... And the company it was all going to work for got a suggestion from a test department employee who was fed up with the manual system. Suggesting that a ZX Spectrum could handle it pretty easily, and he had a boy who could write the code... :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
OriginalGriff wrote:
Suggesting that a ZX Spectrum could handle it pretty easily
And he probably was right about that part... :-D
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
-
Because QuickC was (possibly the first, certainly the first I met) integrated IDE: editor, compiler, and debugger in a single package, and that meant you didn't have to faff about switching apps and building make files. And the documentation was one (F1) key away! :-D Prior to QuickC I was using vi, and compiling C on unix... :~ Or EDLIN on PC. Ouch! Later I moved to Brief (the Programmers Editor) - which had a thicker manual than 123 and DOS put together! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
No Turbo Pascal? :wtf: In college I had some classes that used VAX Pascal and others that used Turbo Pascal. My first introduction to C was with Whitesmith's C on a VAX, but later I got to use Turbo C, never Quick C. All the C I did on paying jobs (1994-2002) was VAX or DEC C; none of those toy compilers. :cool:
-
I posted yesterday[^] about someone trying to learn with archaic tools, and that lead to finding QuickC for Dos on an abandonware site. I used to love that program! And yes, it does run in DosBox. Good things: 1) It's quick. Compilation is slower than I remember: for a really tiny app it spends a lot of time linking. But it loads and unloads practically instantly, much, much faster than VS. 2) The help is miles better than VS. Put it like this: it works. It could use some clarification - for example
strcpydoesn't tell you which is the source and which the destination. 3) 16 bit integers! Bad things: 1) I'd forgotten how damn limited C is! And how long it takes to get anything done with standard libraries instead of a framework doing it all behind the scenes. I want my classes back! 2) Only 21 lines of code on screen at any one time, and only 80 chars wide. 3) Copy and Paste are the old style "CTRL+INS" and "SHIFT+INS" (I'd forgotten those, but they still work in Win7!) 4) Um. That's it. Perhaps I won't use it in anger again (I mean, when am I going to need a 16 bit application?) but it brings back a lot of memories - some of them good. Anyone else remember this one?Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
My nostalgia[^] seems to be a lot better :D I still enjoy those! (the actual good old ones, not (all of) the newer they have nowadays)...
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
} -
Because QuickC was (possibly the first, certainly the first I met) integrated IDE: editor, compiler, and debugger in a single package, and that meant you didn't have to faff about switching apps and building make files. And the documentation was one (F1) key away! :-D Prior to QuickC I was using vi, and compiling C on unix... :~ Or EDLIN on PC. Ouch! Later I moved to Brief (the Programmers Editor) - which had a thicker manual than 123 and DOS put together! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
Yes, it was a nice IDE and amazing in those days of EDLIN and Vi.
-
I posted yesterday[^] about someone trying to learn with archaic tools, and that lead to finding QuickC for Dos on an abandonware site. I used to love that program! And yes, it does run in DosBox. Good things: 1) It's quick. Compilation is slower than I remember: for a really tiny app it spends a lot of time linking. But it loads and unloads practically instantly, much, much faster than VS. 2) The help is miles better than VS. Put it like this: it works. It could use some clarification - for example
strcpydoesn't tell you which is the source and which the destination. 3) 16 bit integers! Bad things: 1) I'd forgotten how damn limited C is! And how long it takes to get anything done with standard libraries instead of a framework doing it all behind the scenes. I want my classes back! 2) Only 21 lines of code on screen at any one time, and only 80 chars wide. 3) Copy and Paste are the old style "CTRL+INS" and "SHIFT+INS" (I'd forgotten those, but they still work in Win7!) 4) Um. That's it. Perhaps I won't use it in anger again (I mean, when am I going to need a 16 bit application?) but it brings back a lot of memories - some of them good. Anyone else remember this one?Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
“Ya remember...when we were kids...how good the jellied bugs used to taste? And there were those long rolls of paper with food stains on them. (You could get two thousand yards for a nickel!) And then there were those little round hard things that would explode in your mouth and blow your lips off... Oh! And the cold pork fat bars with the carpet tacks! Boy, they don’t make stuff like that any more... These days it’s all goddamn chemicals!”
(In remembrance of Bernard Kliban)
(This message is programming you in ways you cannot detect. Be afraid.)
-
Because QuickC was (possibly the first, certainly the first I met) integrated IDE: editor, compiler, and debugger in a single package, and that meant you didn't have to faff about switching apps and building make files. And the documentation was one (F1) key away! :-D Prior to QuickC I was using vi, and compiling C on unix... :~ Or EDLIN on PC. Ouch! Later I moved to Brief (the Programmers Editor) - which had a thicker manual than 123 and DOS put together! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
I still "relapse" back to BRIEF emulation on Visual Slick Edit when I want to get something complicated done quickly in a text editor.
-
Because QuickC was (possibly the first, certainly the first I met) integrated IDE: editor, compiler, and debugger in a single package, and that meant you didn't have to faff about switching apps and building make files. And the documentation was one (F1) key away! :-D Prior to QuickC I was using vi, and compiling C on unix... :~ Or EDLIN on PC. Ouch! Later I moved to Brief (the Programmers Editor) - which had a thicker manual than 123 and DOS put together! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
Oh yes, BRIEF was brilliant. You could even go 50 line mode. The macro language was the bomb. Wonder why they never moved over to a Windows version?
-
Oh yes, BRIEF was brilliant. You could even go 50 line mode. The macro language was the bomb. Wonder why they never moved over to a Windows version?
Oh yes. I liked the C extension language (although it was a little complex). And you could set up execution of a makefile, and ... In some ways it's still better than the editor in VS - I really miss being able to open multiple files (or even multiple views on the same file) in the "edit space" of VS. I know you can open a "second window on the same file, but it's not the same... :sigh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
-
I posted yesterday[^] about someone trying to learn with archaic tools, and that lead to finding QuickC for Dos on an abandonware site. I used to love that program! And yes, it does run in DosBox. Good things: 1) It's quick. Compilation is slower than I remember: for a really tiny app it spends a lot of time linking. But it loads and unloads practically instantly, much, much faster than VS. 2) The help is miles better than VS. Put it like this: it works. It could use some clarification - for example
strcpydoesn't tell you which is the source and which the destination. 3) 16 bit integers! Bad things: 1) I'd forgotten how damn limited C is! And how long it takes to get anything done with standard libraries instead of a framework doing it all behind the scenes. I want my classes back! 2) Only 21 lines of code on screen at any one time, and only 80 chars wide. 3) Copy and Paste are the old style "CTRL+INS" and "SHIFT+INS" (I'd forgotten those, but they still work in Win7!) 4) Um. That's it. Perhaps I won't use it in anger again (I mean, when am I going to need a 16 bit application?) but it brings back a lot of memories - some of them good. Anyone else remember this one?Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
Dare I show my age here :-) What about ANSI C & ISO Pascal on a 32k BBC Model B Micro, using Wordstar as the text editor!! Now that was real programming... unless you want to get down and dirty with 6502 & Z80 hex opcodes. Shawty
-
I posted yesterday[^] about someone trying to learn with archaic tools, and that lead to finding QuickC for Dos on an abandonware site. I used to love that program! And yes, it does run in DosBox. Good things: 1) It's quick. Compilation is slower than I remember: for a really tiny app it spends a lot of time linking. But it loads and unloads practically instantly, much, much faster than VS. 2) The help is miles better than VS. Put it like this: it works. It could use some clarification - for example
strcpydoesn't tell you which is the source and which the destination. 3) 16 bit integers! Bad things: 1) I'd forgotten how damn limited C is! And how long it takes to get anything done with standard libraries instead of a framework doing it all behind the scenes. I want my classes back! 2) Only 21 lines of code on screen at any one time, and only 80 chars wide. 3) Copy and Paste are the old style "CTRL+INS" and "SHIFT+INS" (I'd forgotten those, but they still work in Win7!) 4) Um. That's it. Perhaps I won't use it in anger again (I mean, when am I going to need a 16 bit application?) but it brings back a lot of memories - some of them good. Anyone else remember this one?Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
OriginalGriff wrote:
- Only 21 lines of code on screen at any one time, and only 80 chars wide.
You can see 46 lines of code in 50-line mode (start with /h switch) ! No way round width limit. I still have this on my pc, runs under XP without needing Dosbox.
-
I posted yesterday[^] about someone trying to learn with archaic tools, and that lead to finding QuickC for Dos on an abandonware site. I used to love that program! And yes, it does run in DosBox. Good things: 1) It's quick. Compilation is slower than I remember: for a really tiny app it spends a lot of time linking. But it loads and unloads practically instantly, much, much faster than VS. 2) The help is miles better than VS. Put it like this: it works. It could use some clarification - for example
strcpydoesn't tell you which is the source and which the destination. 3) 16 bit integers! Bad things: 1) I'd forgotten how damn limited C is! And how long it takes to get anything done with standard libraries instead of a framework doing it all behind the scenes. I want my classes back! 2) Only 21 lines of code on screen at any one time, and only 80 chars wide. 3) Copy and Paste are the old style "CTRL+INS" and "SHIFT+INS" (I'd forgotten those, but they still work in Win7!) 4) Um. That's it. Perhaps I won't use it in anger again (I mean, when am I going to need a 16 bit application?) but it brings back a lot of memories - some of them good. Anyone else remember this one?Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
I remember it very well, I still use CTRL+INS and SHIFT+INS for copying and pasting these days!
