From: "Jack Peacock" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Debunking the old school myth Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 22:54:35 -0800 Organization: personal use Lines: 68 Message-ID: <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> References: <7188v7$iij$1@saturn.bton.ac.uk> <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12> NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.168.124.157 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: 909903019 TWNY2XU9G7C9DCFA8C usenet54.supernews.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!Supernews73!supernews.com!Supernews69!not-for-mail Joseph M. Newcomer wrote in message <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12>... >Every once in a while, I find a post by some young programmers >lamenting the existence of Windows and talking about the Good Old Days >when Programmers were Programmers, and could poke the memory of their >(TRS-80, Apple I, SOL, Atari). Guys, you don't know what you're >talking about! > >What is amusing is that when the microprocessor was introduced, there >was a lot of lamenting by all the folks who missed the "golden age" of >mainframe computing. > I'm sure there are people still waxing nostalgic about outhouses and hand cranked cars too. I worked on mainframes (Univac 1100s, CDC 6000s), minis (DEC 8/11, DG Nova), micros (still have my hand assembled IMSAI S-100, 20 years old and still runs), and on down to embedded controllers (8051s). Sure it was fun getting the S-100 running, and keeping it running, really paid off in terms of being forced to learn digital electronics, but don't ever let anyone tell you an S-100 or a TRS-80 was better than a 450Mhz P II or a 600Mhz Alpha, there isn't even a remote comparison. The real Golden Age was a nightmare of incompatible parts, software that usually didn't work, and no one to call for help. Either you figured it out or you lost the time and money you invested in the project. More than once I disassembled some program because there was no documentation for it, and too many times to recall I cut traces and rewired boards to make them work together. What does the X86 bring to the world? How about something as simple as standard I/O addresses for devices? On S-100's, no two serial boards used the same port addresses, usually they didn't even use the same type UART. We have the 8250/16x50 standard now, but who remembers when a serial card meant an Intel 8251 (IMSAI), a Motorola 6850 (MITS), a TI TMS5501 (Dynabyte), or a GI hardwired UART (generic no names)? All of these weren't even remotely software compatible. And if you think that's bad, you should have seen the effort to get early DRAM based boards to work. Hard to believe now, but at one time virtually all micros used static RAM because DRAM was considered to be unreliable. I have to laugh when I see complaints about how unreliable Windows or PC hardware is. I never saw an old 60s/70's vintage multi-million dollar mainframe with the uptime reliability of my Alpha NT server. Just when was the concept of checkpointing programs phased out? (For those too young to have ever heard of it, checkpointing was when you saved your program and status at a restartable point, in case the machine went down.) Myself, I don't miss the old 026 card punch, wire-wrapped boards, or the tedious hours taking apart assembly code to reconstruct some documentation. Just out of curiousity, are there still chess boards in university computer labs? In the old days this was very common, passing the time playing chess while waiting for your batch job to finish at 1am. CRTs, timesharing you say? Nope, programming was a keypunch, an RJE card reader printer, and pray the JCL was right because turnaround was 30 minutes or more. Jack Peacock ###### From: joet@jtcs.net (joet) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 10:17:13 -0500 Organization: jtcs Lines: 21 Message-ID: References: <7188v7$iij$1@saturn.bton.ac.uk> <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12> <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-878.newsdawg.com X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.10 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!pln-w!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews4 In article <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com>, peacock@simconv.com says... > I have to laugh when I see complaints about how unreliable > Windows or PC hardware is. I never saw an old 60s/70's vintage > multi-million dollar mainframe with the uptime reliability of my > Alpha NT server. Agreed. I recently told a client to do an automated reboot on a system twice a week (two minutes, max) to pretty much guarantee an end to a memory leakage problem on an IIS and Cold Fusion web server. They acted like I didn't understand how computers are supposed to work and refused, bitching about unreliablity and using the phrases "production system", "unacceptable downtime", and "high availablity" like they were part of a mantra. People don't remember the hours of scheduled downtime every month when the DEC Field Service boys came in to do PM. Or trying to sneak an extra disk pack (or, god forbid, TWO!) into the budget so we could do disk-to- disk backups and only shut the system down for two hours/night. -joet ###### From: richm@ucesucks.mulveyr.roc.servtech.com (Rich) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: 1 Nov 1998 18:19:44 GMT Organization: Mulvey Home Node Lines: 33 Message-ID: References: <7188v7$iij$1@saturn.bton.ac.uk> <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12> <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> Reply-To: mulveyr@ucesucks.mulveyr.roc.servtech.com NNTP-Posting-Host: mulveyr.roc.servtech.com X-no-archive: yes X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.4.3 UNIX) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!howland.erols.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.news.gtei.net!news.new-york.net!nntp.frontiernet.net!node17.frontiernet.net!xcski.com!post.servtech.com!richm On Sun, 1 Nov 1998 10:17:13 -0500, joet wrote: >Agreed. I recently told a client to do an automated reboot on a system >twice a week (two minutes, max) to pretty much guarantee an end to a >memory leakage problem on an IIS and Cold Fusion web server. They acted >like I didn't understand how computers are supposed to work and refused, >bitching about unreliablity and using the phrases "production system", >"unacceptable downtime", and "high availablity" like they were part of a >mantra. > God forbid that customers expect their systems to actually perform reliably, when the software and hardware systems that allow them to do so have been affordable, and available, for years. The next thing you know, they'll be so crass as to hire only consultants who believe that they should actually deliver those capabilities. Of course, IT systems are much more important to many businesses these days than just a few years ago. In the systems that I build for my company, a few minutes of downtime mean *substantial* amounts of revenue can be lost. That's why, for example, we don't use NT based systems. :-) I get somewhat amused at requirements to have machines reboot at weekly intervals, when I just had to bring down a Solaris box that had been running for just under 500 days, while running some extremely heavy-duty database, printing, and I/O apps because of a power hit. - Rich -- Rich Mulvey My return address is my last name, followed by my first initial, @mulveyr.roc.servtech.com http://mulveyr.roc.servtech.com Amateur Radio: aa2ys@wb2wxq.#wny.ny.usa ###### Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth From: riplin@kcbbs.gen.nz (Richard Plinston) Date: 2 Nov 98 18:32:06 GMT Message-ID: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> References: Organization: Kappa Crucis Unix BBS, Auckland, New Zealand Lines: 44 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!news.tele2.nl!newsfeed1.swip.net!swipnet!newsfeed.cwix.com!203.97.37.7!newsfeed.clear.net.nz!status.gen.nz!kcbbs!riplin In message <> joet@jtcs.net writes: > > > I have to laugh when I see complaints about how unreliable > > Windows or PC hardware is. I never saw an old 60s/70's vintage > > multi-million dollar mainframe with the uptime reliability of my > > Alpha NT server. > > Agreed. I recently told a client to do an automated reboot on a system > twice a week (two minutes, max) to pretty much guarantee an end to a > memory leakage problem on an IIS and Cold Fusion web server. They acted This wouldn't stop 'memory leakage' but would simply recover all the leaked memory. It's like stopping the car every few miles because your luggage has fallen out of the trunk _again_. > like I didn't understand how computers are supposed to work and refused, > bitching about unreliablity and using the phrases "production system", > "unacceptable downtime", and "high availablity" like they were part of a > mantra. This is a web server, right ? Do you just kick the plug out the wall ? or do you have some mechanism of waiting until all web users have completed and gone away ? How would you tell ? > > People don't remember the hours of scheduled downtime every month when > the DEC Field Service boys came in to do PM. Or trying to sneak an extra > disk pack (or, god forbid, TWO!) into the budget so we could do disk-to- > disk backups and only shut the system down for two hours/night. This was/is _scheduled_ downtime, and on a batch system no doubt. For the last 20 years or more high availability systems ran without break for months or years. Even on a PC system it would be expected that Netware would run for months, and not require rebooting just because of a reconfiruration or software update. In that sense your suggestion, and the need for it is a significantly retrograde step. Saying that it is no worse than what happened in the dark ages of computing is hardly any form of progress. ###### From: "Samael" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 11:23:30 -0000 Lines: 49 Message-ID: <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.126.84.8 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!diablo.theplanet.net!btnet-peer!btnet!nntp.news.xara.net!xara.net!news.itg.net.uk!127.0.0.1!192.168.0.1 Richard Plinston wrote in message <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz>... >In message <> joet@jtcs.net writes: >> >> > I have to laugh when I see complaints about how unreliable >> > Windows or PC hardware is. I never saw an old 60s/70's vintage >> > multi-million dollar mainframe with the uptime reliability of my >> > Alpha NT server. >> >> Agreed. I recently told a client to do an automated reboot on a system >> twice a week (two minutes, max) to pretty much guarantee an end to a >> memory leakage problem on an IIS and Cold Fusion web server. They acted > >This wouldn't stop 'memory leakage' but would simply recover >all the leaked memory. It's like stopping the car every few >miles because your luggage has fallen out of the trunk >_again_. > >> like I didn't understand how computers are supposed to work and refused, >> bitching about unreliablity and using the phrases "production system", >> "unacceptable downtime", and "high availablity" like they were part of a >> mantra. > >This is a web server, right ? Do you just kick the plug out >the wall ? or do you have some mechanism of waiting until >all web users have completed and gone away ? How would >you tell ? Any web server that is running a production system ought to be duplicated in case of unforseen problems , anyway. In that case, you could just down each of the two machines in turn, leaving one of them to cope by itself for 5 minutes. Yes, IIS shouldn't be losing memory, but I've seen very few programs that didn't have some kind of memory leak and a 2 minute downtime on a non-crucial system isn#'t the end of the world. The simple thing to do would be to schedule 5 minutes downtime at 3:00am Sundays and Wednesday (or whatever). Our internal mailserver has a similar problem and so I down it for a reboot once a week. As very few people need it at 4:00am on a sunday, it doesn't seem to cause many problems. Samael ###### From: lisard@zetnet.co.uk Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: 4 Nov 1998 00:05:15 GMT Lines: 46 Message-ID: <71o5nr$tpr$9@irk.zetnet.co.uk> References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> NNTP-Posting-Host: man-037.dialup.zetnet.co.uk X-Trace: irk.zetnet.co.uk 910137915 30523 194.247.41.46 (4 Nov 1998 00:05:15 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 Nov 1998 00:05:15 GMT X-Everything: Net-Tamer V 1.08X Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!195.200.0.51.MISMATCH!newshub.bart.net!ayres.ftech.net!news.ftech.net!peer.news.zetnet.net!zetnet.co.uk!not-for-mail On 1998-11-02 riplin@kcbbs.gen.nz(RichardPlinston) said: :joet@jtcs.net writes: > :> Agreed. I recently told a client to do an automated reboot on a :>system twice a week (two minutes, max) to pretty much guarantee :>an end to a memory leakage problem on an IIS and Cold Fusion web :server. They acted :This wouldn't stop 'memory leakage' but would simply recover :all the leaked memory. It's like stopping the car every few :miles because your luggage has fallen out of the trunk :_again_. Well, yes, that's the case, but it's probably a better proposition than offering to patch up the combination of NT, IIS and Cold Fusion so that the memory leaks go away. After all, he was only charged with solving the problem, not solving its cause... :This is a web server, right ? Do you just kick the plug out :the wall ? or do you have some mechanism of waiting until :all web users have completed and gone away ? How would :you tell ? Well, the whole point of HTTP is that it's connectionless, so rebooting really shouldn't be that big an issue. More of a problem is the time NT takes to complete a reboot cycle (I've had it freeze on reboot; I have an NT Server machine running as a workstation at work. It's about what it's good for) which makes for a far longer out-time than is desirable. Replication would help. :In that sense your suggestion, and the need for it is a :significantly retrograde step. Saying that it is no worse :than what happened in the dark ages of computing is :hardly any form of progress. Yes, but bitching at him probably ain't gonna help any. He didn't write either of the three programs causing the problem. But certainly, this really should not happen these days. I wonder how much of the problem is with COM and the basic flaw in its garbage collection strategy - like all reference counting methods, it can't collect cycles...? -- Communa (together) we remember... we'll see you falling you know soft spoken changes nothing to sing within her... ###### From: joet@jtcs.net (joet) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 11:05:58 -0500 Organization: jtcs Lines: 32 Message-ID: References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <71o5nr$tpr$9@irk.zetnet.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-155.newsdawg.com X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.10 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newscore.univie.ac.at!newsfeed.ecrc.net!btnet-peer!btnet!newsfeed.cwix.com!205.252.116.205!howland.erols.net!pln-e!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews2 In article <71o5nr$tpr$9@irk.zetnet.co.uk>, lisard@zetnet.co.uk says... > > > On 1998-11-02 riplin@kcbbs.gen.nz(RichardPlinston) said: > Well, the whole point of HTTP is that it's connectionless, so rebooting > really shouldn't be that big an issue. More of a problem is the time NT > takes to complete a reboot cycle (I've had it freeze on reboot; I have > an NT Server machine running as a workstation at work. It's about what > it's good for) which makes for a far longer out-time than is desirable. > Replication would help. > > :In that sense your suggestion, and the need for it is a > :significantly retrograde step. Saying that it is no worse > :than what happened in the dark ages of computing is > :hardly any form of progress. > > Yes, but bitching at him probably ain't gonna help any. He didn't write > either of the three programs causing the problem. But certainly, this > really should not happen these days. Of course we wish we had come further by now. The discussion, however, was about the idea of how shitty things have become. My point was that system availability in the good old days wasn't necessarily better than today in spite of our much bemoaned crummy code, bogus operating systems, and unreliable hardware. With all that, having to "kick the plug out of the wall" on a web server twice weekly and calling it "hardly any form of progress" pretty much confirms my proposition. -joet ###### From: jmfbahciv@aol.com Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: Wed, 04 Nov 98 12:30:39 GMT Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc. Lines: 15 Message-ID: <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net> References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> NNTP-Posting-Host: d16.dial-17.mbo.ma.ultra.net X-Complaints-To: abuse@ultra.net X-Ultra-Time: 4 Nov 1998 12:48:02 GMT X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.xcom.net!news.ultranet.com!d16 In article <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1>, "Samael" wrote: > >Yes, IIS shouldn't be losing memory, but I've seen very few programs that >didn't have some kind of memory leak and a 2 minute downtime on a >non-crucial system isn#'t the end of the world. Surely you're joking about so many programs having memory management problems [astounded emoticon here]. Or am I misunderstanding the phrase "memory leak". /BAH Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail. ###### From: "Samael" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 14:04:15 -0000 Lines: 27 Message-ID: <36405ee1.0@127.0.0.1> References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.147.8.91 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.news.xara.net!xara.net!news.itg.net.uk!127.0.0.1!192.168.0.1 jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote in message <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net>... >In article <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1>, "Samael" wrote: > > >> >>Yes, IIS shouldn't be losing memory, but I've seen very few programs that >>didn't have some kind of memory leak and a 2 minute downtime on a >>non-crucial system isn#'t the end of the world. > >Surely you're joking about so many programs having memory management >problems [astounded emoticon here]. Or am I misunderstanding >the phrase "memory leak". It does depend on the language, and very few programs have large leaks (those are usually obvious enough to spot quickly). And some OS' can easily spot that sort of things and tidy up around programs that do leak. But most programs I've seen that use pointers manage to lose the occasional one. This is because no programmer is expert enough not to occasionally forget to tidy up after themselves. Samael ###### From: Ingvar Mattsson Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: 04 Nov 1998 16:19:54 +0100 Organization: Telia Internet Services Lines: 33 Message-ID: References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: d2o61.telia.com X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 20.2 X-NNTP-Posting-Host: ns.idasys.se X-Complaints-To: abuse@internet.telia.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!212.63.192.161.MISMATCH!newshub.bart.net!news.tele2.nl!newsfeed1.swip.net!swipnet!masternews.telia.net!newspost.telia.com!d2o61.telia.com!ns.idasys.se jmfbahciv@aol.com writes: > In article <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1>, "Samael" wrote: > > > > > >Yes, IIS shouldn't be losing memory, but I've seen very few programs that > >didn't have some kind of memory leak and a 2 minute downtime on a > >non-crucial system isn#'t the end of the world. > > Surely you're joking about so many programs having memory management > problems [astounded emoticon here]. Or am I misunderstanding > the phrase "memory leak". Nope. Memory leaks are a big problem in today's software world. Thus you find programs like purify et. al. to hunt them down. ;) Unfortunately, I can't cite any definite memory-leak problem in old DEC programs, but when I get around to talk to the local old-DEC-stuff fans, I'll probably get a few examples... ;) And, usually, memory-leaks are not noticeable on a small time scale (program runs for only an hour -> no big leaks; program runs continuusly for a month -> noticeable memory leaks). As far as I'm concerned, the worst offender I've seen, so far, is old emacsen and Word. //Ingvar (growing, grooowing, *BLOAT*) -- Sysadmin, disgruntled, unpolite. I don't speak for my employer nor do they speak for me. Accept this and life will be easier. ingvar@idasys.se ###### Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers From: alderson@netcom.netcom.com (Richard M. Alderson III) Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth In-Reply-To: Ingvar Mattsson's message of 04 Nov 1998 16:19:54 +0100 Message-ID: Sender: alderson@netcom.netcom.com Reply-To: alderson@netcom.com Organization: NETCOM On-line services References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net> Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 20:42:31 GMT Lines: 12 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newshub.bart.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!news.tele2.nl!newsfeed1.swip.net!swipnet!newshub.northeast.verio.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom!alderson In article Ingvar Mattsson writes: >As far as I'm concerned, the worst offender I've seen, so far, is old emacsen >and Word. Well, there are no memory leaks in EMACS: It takes over the entire 256Kword memory space and uses it. So you must be talking about new emacsen... ;-> -- Rich Alderson Last LOTS Tops-20 Systems Programmer, 1984-1991 Current maintainer, MIT TECO EMACS (v. 170) last name @ XKL dot COM Chief systems administrator, XKL LLC, 1998-now ###### Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 23:38:54 +0100 Message-ID: From: peterk@combo.ganesha.com (Dr. Peter Kittel) Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Reply-To: peterk @ combo.ganesha.com References: <7188v7$iij$1@saturn.bton.ac.uk> <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12> <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> X-Newsreader: rn7.bas Lines: 25 Organization: Private Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newscore.univie.ac.at!newsfeed.ecrc.net!blackbush.xlink.net!ganesha.ganesha.com!shorter!combo.ganesha.com!peterk In article <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> "Jack Peacock" writes: >Joseph M. Newcomer wrote in message ><3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12>... >>Every once in a while, I find a post by some young programmers >>lamenting the existence of Windows and talking about the Good >>Old Days >>when Programmers were Programmers, and could poke the memory of >>their >>(TRS-80, Apple I, SOL, Atari). Guys, you don't know what you're >>talking about! > >I'm sure there are people still waxing nostalgic about outhouses >and hand cranked cars too. In Europe, we still mainly use hand cranked cars. They are more energy efficient. But what I do lament is that in those old days a much higher percentage of the users were also programmers and generally computer literate. That has changed drastically, not to the advantage of the quality of living as a computer literate person. -- Best Regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail: Private Site in Frankfurt, Germany \X/ peterk @ combo.ganesha.com ###### From: richm@ucesucks.mulveyr.roc.servtech.com (Rich) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: 5 Nov 1998 01:54:50 GMT Organization: Mulvey Home Node Lines: 30 Message-ID: References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net> <36405ee1.0@127.0.0.1> Reply-To: mulveyr@ucesucks.mulveyr.roc.servtech.com NNTP-Posting-Host: mulveyr.roc.servtech.com X-no-archive: yes X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.4.3 UNIX) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!howland.erols.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!post.servtech.com!richm On Wed, 4 Nov 1998 14:04:15 -0000, Samael wrote: >It does depend on the language, and very few programs have large leaks >(those are usually obvious enough to spot quickly). And some OS' can easily >spot that sort of things and tidy up around programs that do leak. > >But most programs I've seen that use pointers manage to lose the occasional >one. This is because no programmer is expert enough not to occasionally >forget to tidy up after themselves. That's precisely the attitude that allows programmers to build crappy software, and get away with it. "Well, this project has 100,000 lines of code, so therefore I shouldn't be ashamed if I have a couple of memory leaks, or I don't handle error conditions robustly, etc." That is nothing more than laziness, pure and simple. There are dozens of tools out there - many of them free - that allow a developer to catch all sorts of problems. Purify, Electric Fence, lint, etc. should all be *mandatory* components of the development process. The language used is irrelevant, if the programmer takes the time and effort to design the system correctly in the first place - establishing strict policies regarding memory management, error handling, and so on. The time spent doing the job right at the beginning is *ALWAYS* paid back by faster, and more accurate implementations. - Rich -- Rich Mulvey My return address is my last name, followed by my first initial, @mulveyr.roc.servtech.com http://mulveyr.roc.servtech.com Amateur Radio: aa2ys@wb2wxq.#wny.ny.usa ###### From: wendling@ganymede.isdn.uiuc.edu () Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: 5 Nov 1998 07:29:51 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Lines: 21 Message-ID: <71rk5f$dlr$1@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> NNTP-Posting-Host: ganymede.isdn.uiuc.edu X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!wendling Samael (Samael@dial.pipex.com) wrote: [snip] : Yes, IIS shouldn't be losing memory, but I've seen very few programs that : didn't have some kind of memory leak [snip] You haven't?!?! My god, man, what software are you using? I would be embarrassed beyond belief if my software went out the door with a memory leak in it. Those get fixed way before that period and there are lots of software packages out there to find just such creatures. Let's hope that there aren't many leaks on air traffic control systems or those that run planes...sheesh. -- || Bill Wendling wendling@ncsa.uiuc.edu ###### Message-ID: <3641B700.6E9F@gazonk.del> Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1998 09:32:32 -0500 From: "Foobar T. Clown" Organization: Blurp X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth References: <7188v7$iij$1@saturn.bton.ac.uk> <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12> <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.133.110.49 X-Trace: 5 Nov 1998 09:33:13 -0500, 198.133.110.49 Lines: 11 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!ix.netcom.com!zeus.nomos.com!198.133.110.49 Dr. Peter Kittel wrote: > In Europe, we still mainly use hand cranked cars. They are more > energy efficient. You may be confusing "hand cranked" with "stick shift." "Hand cranked" refers to cars that were made before the invention of the electric starter. To start them, somebody had to literally crank the engine by hand using a large metal crank that stuck out through the front bumper of the car at about knee level. I've never seen anybody start a car by hand cranking except in a movie. ###### From: Ingvar Mattsson Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: 05 Nov 1998 11:51:09 +0100 Organization: Telia Internet Services Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: d2o61.telia.com X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 20.2 X-NNTP-Posting-Host: ns.idasys.se X-Complaints-To: abuse@internet.telia.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!masternews.telia.net!newspost.telia.com!d2o61.telia.com!ns.idasys.se alderson@netcom.netcom.com (Richard M. Alderson III) writes: > In article Ingvar Mattsson > writes: > > >As far as I'm concerned, the worst offender I've seen, so far, is old emacsen > >and Word. > > Well, there are no memory leaks in EMACS: It takes over the entire 256Kword > memory space and uses it. So you must be talking about new emacsen... ;-> Depends on what one means with "old" and "new". Emacs-18 leaked a bit. Not a problem, if one remembered to exit one's editor once in a while (one or two times per week, IIRC). OTOH, one could probably make a case for emacs-18 being a brand-new emacs, not worthy of even being mentioned. ;) //Ingvar (no witticism here, today) -- Sysadmin, disgruntled, unpolite. I don't speak for my employer nor do they speak for me. Accept this and life will be easier. ingvar@idasys.se ###### From: jmfbahciv@aol.com Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: Thu, 05 Nov 98 13:22:07 GMT Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc. Lines: 40 Message-ID: <71s9qs$71d$1@ligarius.ultra.net> References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net> <36405ee1.0@127.0.0.1> NNTP-Posting-Host: d6.dial-13.mbo.ma.ultra.net X-Complaints-To: abuse@ultra.net X-Ultra-Time: 5 Nov 1998 13:39:40 GMT X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!212.63.192.161.MISMATCH!newshub.bart.net!news.tele2.nl!newsfeed1.swip.net!swipnet!newshub.northeast.verio.net!newsfeed.xcom.net!news.ultranet.com!d6 In article <36405ee1.0@127.0.0.1>, "Samael" wrote: > >jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote in message <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net>... >>In article <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1>, "Samael" wrote: >> >> >>> >>>Yes, IIS shouldn't be losing memory, but I've seen very few programs that >>>didn't have some kind of memory leak and a 2 minute downtime on a >>>non-crucial system isn#'t the end of the world. >> >>Surely you're joking about so many programs having memory management >>problems [astounded emoticon here]. Or am I misunderstanding >>the phrase "memory leak". > > > >It does depend on the language, and very few programs have >large leaks (those are usually obvious enough to spot quickly). >And some OS' can easily spot that sort of things and tidy up >around programs that do leak. That's not an OS's job. > >But most programs I've seen that use pointers manage to >lose the occasional one. This is because no programmer is >expert enough not to occasionally forget to tidy up after >themselves. Nonsense, (at least not in my corner of the business). Such an untidiness was considered a bug and, if found, got fixed. We spent lots of pre-ship time just looking for these bugs as a part of the shakedown. /BAH Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail. ###### From: Louis RAPHAEL Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: 5 Nov 1998 14:42:16 GMT Organization: Societe pour la promotion du petoncle vert Lines: 19 Message-ID: <71sdg8$k44@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca> References: <7188v7$iij$1@saturn.bton.ac.uk> <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12> <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> <3641B700.6E9F@gazonk.del> NNTP-Posting-Host: lisa.cs.mcgill.ca X-No-Archive: Yes User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-971127 (UNIX) (SunOS/4.1.4 (sun4m)) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!news.mcgill.ca!cs.mcgill.ca!raphael Foobar T. Clown wrote: : I've never seen anybody start a car by hand cranking except in a movie. My father had this really ancient tractor (1940s) that had an /option/ for a hand-crank to be used to start it. I believe that he used it a couple of times (I was very small, so I don't remember very well) just to see how it worked, or maybe because the battery was dead. I believe that until a few years ago Lada made (or maybe even still makes?) vehicles with a hand-crank option... Louis -- "Improve your computer - type "DELTREE C:\WINDOZE" at the DOS prompt." ###### Date: 05 Nov 98 11:26:41 -0800 From: "Charlie Gibbs" Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth References: <7188v7$iij$1@saturn.bton.ac.uk> <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12> <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> <3641B700.6E9F@gazonk.del> <71sdg8$k44@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca> Message-ID: <1393.613T2088T6865353@sky.bus.com> Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Lines: 34 X-Newsreader: THOR 2.5a (Amiga;TCP/IP) NNTP-Posting-Host: news.skybus.com X-Trace: 5 Nov 1998 12:15:35 -0800, news.skybus.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-xfer.newsread.com!netaxs.com!newsread.com!newshub.northeast.verio.net!news-pen-3.sprintlink.net!news-in-east1.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.westel.com!news.skybus.com!204.244.247.120 In article <71sdg8$k44@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca> raphael@cs.mcgill.ca (Louis RAPHAEL) writes: >Foobar T. Clown wrote: > >: I've never seen anybody start a car by hand cranking except in a >:movie. > >My father had this really ancient tractor (1940s) that had an /option/ >for a hand-crank to be used to start it. I believe that he used it a >couple of times (I was very small, so I don't remember very well) just >to see how it worked, or maybe because the battery was dead. > >I believe that until a few years ago Lada made (or maybe even still >makes?) vehicles with a hand-crank option... Back in the early '70s I had a 1965 Morris Minor (the 4-door version, quite a collector's item). I was puzzled by the way the jack handle had a long extension with a couple of bumps sticking out on the end, until it was pointed out to me just what it was for. And sure enough, one night when my battery was dead, I drove around town, making several stops, and each time I went to start up I'd feed that long end through the hole in the front bumper, engage those little bumps in the crankshaft, and crank it up. Worked like a charm. > "Improve your computer - type "DELTREE C:\WINDOZE" at the DOS prompt." I'm afraid this is one place where you have to spell "Windows" correctly... ;-) -- cgibbs@sky.bus.com (Charlie Gibbs) Remove the first period after the "at" sign to reply. ###### Message-ID: <364210A9.77C@compuserve.com> Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1998 12:55:05 -0800 From: Sam Yorko X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth References: <7188v7$iij$1@saturn.bton.ac.uk> <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12> <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> <3641B700.6E9F@gazonk.del> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: exosecure-symbol.psd.symbol.com X-NNTP-Posting-Host: exosecure-symbol.psd.symbol.com Organization: news://newsread.exodus.net : Crossing the Invisible Line Lines: 22 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.idt.net!kiowa.exodus.net!207.82.39.214.MISMATCH!newsread.exodus.net!exosecure-symbol.psd.symbol.com Foobar T. Clown wrote: > > Dr. Peter Kittel wrote: > > In Europe, we still mainly use hand cranked cars. They are more > > energy efficient. > > You may be confusing "hand cranked" with "stick shift." "Hand cranked" > refers to cars that were made before the invention of the electric > starter. To start them, somebody had to literally crank the engine by > hand using a large metal crank that stuck out through the front bumper > of the car at about knee level. > > I've never seen anybody start a car by hand cranking except in a movie. I learned to drive on a 1931 Ford Model A (I'm probably the youngest person to be able to say this). The car had the option for hand crank start, as well as an electric starter. My dad hand cranked it a few times, but hand cranking was dangerous, in that sometimes the engine would back spin, whipping the crank back around and breaking your wrist or arm. Sam ###### From: Mike Swaim Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net> <36405ee1.0@127.0.0.1> <71s9qs$71d$1@ligarius.ultra.net> User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-980226 (UNIX) (FreeBSD/2.2.6-RELEASE (i386)) Lines: 15 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1998 22:33:53 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.127.0.130 X-Trace: news2.giganews.com 910305233 209.127.0.130 (Thu, 05 Nov 1998 16:33:53 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1998 16:33:53 CDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!btnet-peer!btnet!newspump.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!nntp.giganews.com!news2.giganews.com.POSTED!gemini.c-com.net!swaim jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote: : Nonsense, (at least not in my corner of the business). Such : an untidiness was considered a bug and, if found, got fixed. : We spent lots of pre-ship time just looking for these bugs : as a part of the shakedown. We have a largish 3 tier system where the client has multiple memory leaks. One of the developers spent several weeks trying to plug them. Unfortunately, the fixes broke other things (Bells should be ringing!), so he was ordered to take them out. Sigh... -- Mike Swaim, Avatar of Chaos: Disclaimer:I sometimes lie. Home: swaim@c-com.net Alum: swaim@rice.edu Quote: "Boingie"^4 Y,W&D ###### From: Andrey Mirtchovski Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 08:28:43 -0600 Organization: University of Saskatchewan Lines: 29 Message-ID: <3643079A.CE040D91@mail.usask.ca> References: <7188v7$iij$1@saturn.bton.ac.uk> <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12> <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> <3641B700.6E9F@gazonk.del> <364210A9.77C@compuserve.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: cyberia.usask.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!cyclone.mbnet.mb.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!tribune.usask.ca!not-for-mail Sam Yorko wrote: > > I learned to drive on a 1931 Ford Model A (I'm probably the youngest > person to be able to say this). The car had the option for hand crank > start, as well as an electric starter. My dad hand cranked it a few > times, but hand cranking was dangerous, in that sometimes the engine > would back spin, whipping the crank back around and breaking your wrist > or arm. > That's why they still teach people how to hand-crank correctly (the position of the hand, the position of the tool, etc.) in (post-) communistic countries. I had to hand crack a car for my driving licence exam and I'm only 22 :) I believe I'm one of the youngest people here to have done that. By the way, trying to bring the attention back to computers - we had to do a bit of FORTRAN card punching on some old machines in High School (again in Bulgaria, as the above) because we had the machines, and because they wanted to teach us something nice and useful... As a card punching programming would be nowadays :) Cheers: Andrey ###### From: Andrey Mirtchovski Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 08:28:58 -0600 Organization: University of Saskatchewan Lines: 28 Message-ID: <364307AA.B89DEB3F@mail.usask.ca> References: <7188v7$iij$1@saturn.bton.ac.uk> <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12> <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> <3641B700.6E9F@gazonk.del> <364210A9.77C@compuserve.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: cyberia.usask.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!news-raspail.gip.net!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!cyclone.mbnet.mb.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!tribune.usask.ca!not-for-mail Sam Yorko wrote: > > I learned to drive on a 1931 Ford Model A (I'm probably the youngest > person to be able to say this). The car had the option for hand crank > start, as well as an electric starter. My dad hand cranked it a few > times, but hand cranking was dangerous, in that sometimes the engine > would back spin, whipping the crank back around and breaking your wrist > or arm. That's why they still teach people how to hand-crank correctly (the position of the hand, the position of the tool, etc.) in (post-) communistic countries. I had to hand crack a car for my driving licence exam and I'm only 22 :) I believe I'm one of the youngest people here to have done that. By the way, trying to bring the attention back to computers - we had to do a bit of FORTRAN card punching on some old machines in High School (again in Bulgaria, as the above) because we had the machines, and because they wanted to teach us something nice and useful... As a card punching programming would be nowadays :) Cheers: Andrey ###### From: jmfbahciv@aol.com Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: Fri, 06 Nov 98 13:01:18 GMT Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc. Lines: 29 Message-ID: <71ut05$r21$1@ligarius.ultra.net> References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net> <36405ee1.0@127.0.0.1> <71s9qs$71d$1@ligarius.ultra.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: d2.dial-12.mbo.ma.ultra.net X-Complaints-To: abuse@ultra.net X-Ultra-Time: 6 Nov 1998 13:19:01 GMT X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!209.244.253.199!newsfeed.xcom.net!news.ultranet.com!d2 In article , Mike Swaim wrote: >jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote: >: Nonsense, (at least not in my corner of the business). Such >: an untidiness was considered a bug and, if found, got fixed. >: We spent lots of pre-ship time just looking for these bugs >: as a part of the shakedown. > > We have a largish 3 tier system where the client has multiple memory >leaks. One of the developers spent several weeks trying to plug them. >Unfortunately, the fixes broke other things (Bells should be ringing!), so >he was ordered to take them out. Sigh... > Then he was installing bandaids rather than fixes. There's a huge difference. We had one programmer who only produced bandaids with the side effect that our backup utility stopped saving bits. Every last one of his "fixes" was pulled (unfortunately, they were public) and the real fixes were generated. If that three-tiered software is that sensitive, then the fix would probably result in one massive bug-fix installation. That would not be a project for faint of heart :-). /BAH Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail. ###### From: Tim Bradshaw Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: 06 Nov 1998 14:55:15 +0000 Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh Lines: 18 Message-ID: References: <7188v7$iij$1@saturn.bton.ac.uk> <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12> <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> <3641B700.6E9F@gazonk.del> <364210A9.77C@compuserve.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: todday.aiai.ed.ac.uk X-Trace: scotsman.ed.ac.uk 910364065 2010 129.215.105.40 (6 Nov 1998 14:54:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@scotsman.ed.ac.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 6 Nov 1998 14:54:25 GMT X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.2.25/XEmacs 19.14 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!news.tele2.nl!newsfeed1.swip.net!swipnet!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.news.xara.net!xara.net!server6.netnews.ja.net!newsfeed.ed.ac.uk!not-for-mail * Sam Yorko wrote: > I learned to drive on a 1931 Ford Model A (I'm probably the youngest > person to be able to say this). The car had the option for hand crank > start, as well as an electric starter. My dad hand cranked it a few > times, but hand cranking was dangerous, in that sometimes the engine > would back spin, whipping the crank back around and breaking your wrist > or arm. I have the scars (actually (looks) they seem to have gone now). The mistake is forgetting set the ignition advance/retard to fully retarded. Now I suppose some people have cars with automatic advance/retard by now. They probably have front-wheel brakes too... --tim ###### From: Mike Swaim Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net> <36405ee1.0@127.0.0.1> <71s9qs$71d$1@ligarius.ultra.net> <71ut05$r21$1@ligarius.ultra.net> User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-980226 (UNIX) (FreeBSD/2.2.6-RELEASE (i386)) Lines: 21 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 08:56:52 CDT X-Trace: sv1-FzgyaE4qwES8/9vigUKvlRTg9U/bKMt+hHOfnIsBYwlV/LwdgGATUtkbotYpwtqmqsBqnfooG7+VyG6!fZE9I3hHM2I= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 14:56:52 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!newspeer.monmouth.com!nntp.giganews.com!news1.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote: : In article , : Mike Swaim wrote: :> We have a largish 3 tier system where the client has multiple memory :>leaks. One of the developers spent several weeks trying to plug them. :>Unfortunately, the fixes broke other things (Bells should be ringing!), so :>he was ordered to take them out. Sigh... : If that three-tiered software is that sensitive, then the : fix would probably result in one massive bug-fix installation. : That would not be a project for faint of heart :-). It's not going to be done. The guy gave his bosses an estimate on the amount of time that it'd take to really fix it, and they told him to work on something else. On the plus side, everybody got upgrades to run the package. -- Mike Swaim, Avatar of Chaos: Disclaimer:I sometimes lie. Home: swaim@c-com.net Alum: swaim@rice.edu Quote: "Boingie"^4 Y,W&D ###### From: Tim Bradshaw Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: 06 Nov 1998 14:59:24 +0000 Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh Lines: 17 Message-ID: References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net> <36405ee1.0@127.0.0.1> <71s9qs$71d$1@ligarius.ultra.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: todday.aiai.ed.ac.uk X-Trace: scotsman.ed.ac.uk 910364314 2010 129.215.105.40 (6 Nov 1998 14:58:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@scotsman.ed.ac.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 6 Nov 1998 14:58:34 GMT X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.2.25/XEmacs 19.14 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newshub.bart.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!diablo.theplanet.net!btnet-peer!btnet!nntp.news.xara.net!xara.net!server6.netnews.ja.net!newsfeed.ed.ac.uk!not-for-mail * jmfbahciv wrote: >> >> It does depend on the language, and very few programs have >> large leaks (those are usually obvious enough to spot quickly). >> And some OS' can easily spot that sort of things and tidy up >> around programs that do leak. > That's not an OS's job. Sure it is, it's the only really sensible place to put the garbage collector, especially on SMP systems & so forth. Or are you talking about languages with no GC, surely no one is till doing all that malloc/free crap by hand? (:) --tim ###### Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 20:59:21 +0100 Message-ID: From: peterk@combo.ganesha.com (Dr. Peter Kittel) Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Reply-To: peterk @ combo.ganesha.com References: <7188v7$iij$1@saturn.bton.ac.uk> <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12> <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> <3641B700.6E9F@gazonk.del> X-Newsreader: rn7.bas Lines: 24 Organization: Private Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.nacamar.de!blackbush.xlink.net!ganesha.ganesha.com!shorter!combo.ganesha.com!peterk In article <3641B700.6E9F@gazonk.del> "Foobar T. Clown" writes: >Dr. Peter Kittel wrote: >> >> In Europe, we still mainly use hand cranked cars. They are more >> energy efficient. > >You may be confusing "hand cranked" with "stick shift." "Hand cranked" >refers to cars that were made before the invention of the electric >starter. Ouch. Seems I'm a bit more literate in English computing terms than in car terms... Now this is a computers newsgroup, so I hope people will forgive me. >I've never seen anybody start a car by hand cranking except in a movie. My parents had as their first car a VW beetle from 1954. It still had a hole in the back (where the motor is in a beetle) so that you could theoretically insert such a crank shaft. I think it even came with one. My father used it only once or twice when the battery had stopped working. -- Best Regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail: Private Site in Frankfurt, Germany \X/ peterk @ combo.ganesha.com ###### From: jmfbahciv@aol.com Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: Sat, 07 Nov 98 12:41:17 GMT Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc. Lines: 28 Message-ID: <721g6v$upm$1@strato.ultra.net> References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net> <36405ee1.0@127.0.0.1> <71s9qs$71d$1@ligarius.ultra.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: d3.dial-15.mbo.ma.ultra.net X-Complaints-To: abuse@ultra.net X-Ultra-Time: 7 Nov 1998 12:59:11 GMT X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!howland.erols.net!newspeer.monmouth.com!news.ultranet.com!d3 In article , Tim Bradshaw wrote: >* jmfbahciv wrote: >>> >>> It does depend on the language, and very few programs have >>> large leaks (those are usually obvious enough to spot quickly). >>> And some OS' can easily spot that sort of things and tidy up >>> around programs that do leak. > >> That's not an OS's job. > >Sure it is, it's the only really sensible place to put the garbage >collector, especially on SMP systems & so forth. It's exactly the wrong place, especially if it's an SMP system. But, I suspect that your definition of SMP is not my definition of SMP :-). So we're not even talking about the same address space. > Or are you talking >about languages with no GC, surely no one is till doing all that >malloc/free crap by hand? Define GC, please. /BAH Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail. ###### From: foxvideo@wincom.net (Charles E. Fox) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Reply-To: foxvideo@wincom.net References: <7188v7$iij$1@saturn.bton.ac.uk> <3649c945.626090597@206.210.64.12> <71h0bb$ll6$1@supernews.com> <3641B700.6E9F@gazonk.del> X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 X-NNTP-Posting-Host: f-xxxii.wincom.net Message-ID: <36458854.0@news.wincom.net> Lines: 38 Date: Sun, 08 Nov 1998 12:04:33 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: news.wincom.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 08 Nov 1998 07:04:33 EST Organization: Shaw FiberLink Ltd. Toronto Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!isdnet!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!206.221.240.3!beaker.tor.sfl.net!bunson.tor.sfl.net!not-for-mail peterk@combo.ganesha.com (Dr. Peter Kittel) wrote: >In article <3641B700.6E9F@gazonk.del> "Foobar T. Clown" writes: >>Dr. Peter Kittel wrote: >>> >>> In Europe, we still mainly use hand cranked cars. They are more >>> energy efficient. >> >>You may be confusing "hand cranked" with "stick shift." "Hand cranked" >>refers to cars that were made before the invention of the electric >>starter. >Ouch. Seems I'm a bit more literate in English computing terms than >in car terms... Now this is a computers newsgroup, so I hope people >will forgive me. >>I've never seen anybody start a car by hand cranking except in a movie. >My parents had as their first car a VW beetle from 1954. It still had >a hole in the back (where the motor is in a beetle) so that you could >theoretically insert such a crank shaft. I think it even came with one. >My father used it only once or twice when the battery had stopped working. >-- >Best Regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail: >Private Site in Frankfurt, Germany \X/ peterk @ combo.ganesha.com My 1952 MG-TD has both a hand crank (sometimes necessary) and a stick shift, but is otherwise not very energy efficent. Regards Charlie Fox Chas E. Fox Video Productions 793 Argyle Rd. Windsor Ontario N8Y 3J8 http://www.wincom.net/foxvideo ###### From: daveva#earthling.net (Dave Vandervies) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Debunking the old school myth Date: Sun, 08 Nov 1998 18:46:16 GMT Organization: TCT-Internet Lines: 20 Message-ID: <3644d457.6389919@news.tct.net> References: <3298305.66726.3991@kcbbs.gen.nz> <363ee7b3.0@127.0.0.1> <71pie2$qh6$1@strato.ultra.net> <36405ee1.0@127.0.0.1> <71s9qs$71d$1@ligarius.ultra.net> <721g6v$upm$1@strato.ultra.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-177.tct.net X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.11/16.235 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!news.tele2.nl!newsfeed1.swip.net!swipnet!newsfeed.cwix.com!130.185.14.36!torn!sabik.tct.net!news On Sat, 07 Nov 98 12:41:17 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote: >In article , > Tim Bradshaw wrote: >>* jmfbahciv wrote: >> >> Or are you talking >>about languages with no GC, surely no one is till doing all that >>malloc/free crap by hand? > >Define GC, please. GC==Garbage Collection It's supposed to clean up memory that's not being used (usually by deallocating it when the last reference to it is dropped) Personally, I'd rather do it myself - that way I know exactly what's being used by what. Much cleaner than with systems that know better than the programmer.