X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at neurotica.com X-NSA-prism-xkeyscore: I do not consent to surveillance, prick X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=neurotica.com; s=default; t=1436378165; bh=9iAQRCOjnwnlOJjMegWIwZci56pX1l851xbpQog7bkQ=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=c0uNoG+RZ0G8x8H284KoyOvekhQrdD8eiyXWSOB7gsXj7aZN5ALQL8tczGxqwyhnA 7dHTe9louXzkxdgIrmZ6EmqtEt/QKrQScM0DlDayKpHwL1CHY5MJ61S7CuXCDXOEpg smTuLfjSj2JHdlcrG7g9cfQxCPGKMwVhX4DQvYJE= Message-ID: <559D6434.3070601@neurotica.com> Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2015 13:56:04 -0400 From: "Dave McGuire (mcguire AT neurotica DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] gEDA/gschem still alive? References: <1435510363 DOT 682 DOT 26 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <20150703030409 DOT 32398 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se> <1436006726 DOT 677 DOT 13 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <20150706200609 DOT GD24178 AT localhost DOT localdomain> <20150707060409 DOT GB14357 AT localhost DOT localdomain> <1436287952 DOT 678 DOT 26 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <559C0F7E DOT 7010009 AT neurotica DOT com> <1436295556 DOT 678 DOT 91 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <559C3778 DOT 4000105 AT neurotica DOT com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id t68I6CoH018610 Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com On 07/08/2015 08:56 AM, Bob Paddock (graceindustries AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote: >> Erlang looks fantastic, until you get to that >> nonintuitive-to-thepoint-of-incomprehensibility syntax! > > That is where Elixir is coming form. > I do think they made a mistake in getting rid of the single > assignment variables. If Elixir solves Erlang's horrible syntax problem, I will definitely have to take a look at it! >> (unless you're running an iAPX-432, which I'm assuming you >> aren't! ;)) > > Didn't I give you my 432 data books? I don't believe so. If it turns out that you still have them, I'd love to get my hands on them! > An obscure short lived processor that did end up influencing those > that came after it. > > Have any 432 based machines in your collection? Sadly not. Very few were produced, and the people who have them aren't turning loose of 'em. My focus is primarily minicomputers and supercomputers, but I'd still love a '432-based system because it's such an unusual architecture. > BTW, I would not describer your place as a rock. More of a cave. :-) It looked a lot like a cave the last time you were here. We've made a great deal of progress over the past couple of months, though; a producer and film crew came here last month to take some footage for a program they're pitching to The Discovery Channel about technology preservation. That provided a very effective kick in the butt to get things organized in here. The first floor is very nearly presentable now. > Seriously, everyone really should make a trip to see the computer > museum Dave is setting up. > I've wondered around the maze of many machines he has in this large > warehouse sized setting. > Impressive collection. Thank you! -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA