I remember the ridiculous attempts to stop the use of GOTOs. I understand that the newer (post FORTRAN IV) compilers permit you to reduce the use of GOTOs, and that really is good. The code does tend to be easier to read. But sometimes, you just need a GOTO.
Anyone remember the structured COBOL period? Only use the period when mandatory, then put it on a line by itself, aligned with the block of code it terminates. (The addition of the END-PERFORM reduced the need for the structured period but it was still useful.)
I grew up with Xerox’s version of Fortran which had some pretty advanced structures, like DO WHILE but we never considered getting rid of GOTOs. At my first programming job (a multi-user BASIC on Eclipse minis), I went to a different school for a year and they used Pascal. In the final for a 400 or 500 level class, the students were required to write some of the new “structured” code. It was a large class and I watched one student after another go up to the prof and say something and sit down. After a dozen or so, he announced “it seems many are having trouble with structure. You may use one GOTO” and a sigh of relief rose in the room. It took a little thought, but I had the structure right, sans GOTO.
Try writing some PDP-8 code without a GOTO, which is one of its eight opcodes. Even the boot is two lines and one is a GOTO.
Ha! I learned FORTRAN IV watfiv (later renamed FORTRAN 66) in my first engineering class during the Gerald Ford administration. I had a thirty-year career using it to write software for flight simulators and weapon systems. One project involved re-writing and updating a huge FORTRAN II program into FORTRAN 77 standards — there were no subroutine calls (everything was in the main), no function library, and it was rife with GOTOs. I managed to get it into a structured format, but it took several months.
After just learning DBase I ruled out anything more complicated than a toaster. A tool, not a torment. I still haven’t found that missing period in a forty page dot matrix printout.
I remember back in ’71, begging my prof to give me a D in PL-1. I promised that the closest I would get to programming would be a TI calculator. I got the D.
Our college gave a programming course in Fortran one summer, but they didn’t have a computer to run the assignments. We had to punch the cards ourselves and then they were sent to the state university to be run. Turnaround time was about a week…
Odd, no one here admits to having ever made the mistake of putting an infinite Do loop in their Fortran programs. I did once at college and once while new at work. The computer operators weren’t happy . . .
catchup over 1 year ago
This made Himself chuckle, having been a programmer and analyst all his working life.
C over 1 year ago
What’s wrong with assembly or Plankalkül?
Baslim the Beggar Premium Member over 1 year ago
I remember the ridiculous attempts to stop the use of GOTOs. I understand that the newer (post FORTRAN IV) compilers permit you to reduce the use of GOTOs, and that really is good. The code does tend to be easier to read. But sometimes, you just need a GOTO.
pschearer Premium Member over 1 year ago
Anyone remember the structured COBOL period? Only use the period when mandatory, then put it on a line by itself, aligned with the block of code it terminates. (The addition of the END-PERFORM reduced the need for the structured period but it was still useful.)
chuuckcly Premium Member over 1 year ago
I don’t think ANYTHING beats a “Computed COMEFROM”
P51Strega over 1 year ago
Working for Rita he probably thinks “GOTO …” half a dozen times a day.
Skeptical Meg over 1 year ago
I grew up with Xerox’s version of Fortran which had some pretty advanced structures, like DO WHILE but we never considered getting rid of GOTOs. At my first programming job (a multi-user BASIC on Eclipse minis), I went to a different school for a year and they used Pascal. In the final for a 400 or 500 level class, the students were required to write some of the new “structured” code. It was a large class and I watched one student after another go up to the prof and say something and sit down. After a dozen or so, he announced “it seems many are having trouble with structure. You may use one GOTO” and a sigh of relief rose in the room. It took a little thought, but I had the structure right, sans GOTO.
Try writing some PDP-8 code without a GOTO, which is one of its eight opcodes. Even the boot is two lines and one is a GOTO.
Jeez I’m old.
papajim545 over 1 year ago
I have no idea what you’re talking about :(
Claymore Premium Member over 1 year ago
Ha! I learned FORTRAN IV watfiv (later renamed FORTRAN 66) in my first engineering class during the Gerald Ford administration. I had a thirty-year career using it to write software for flight simulators and weapon systems. One project involved re-writing and updating a huge FORTRAN II program into FORTRAN 77 standards — there were no subroutine calls (everything was in the main), no function library, and it was rife with GOTOs. I managed to get it into a structured format, but it took several months.
RonnieAThompson Premium Member over 1 year ago
FORTRAN, BASIC and LISP are my favorites
goboboyd over 1 year ago
After just learning DBase I ruled out anything more complicated than a toaster. A tool, not a torment. I still haven’t found that missing period in a forty page dot matrix printout.
DawnQuinn1 over 1 year ago
I used too many “if and then” statements. Thought it would shorten the workload. Nope.
awittbek Premium Member over 1 year ago
I always found a good POKE to be useful.
MRC112 over 1 year ago
If you’ve coded it properly there should be no need for a GOTO.
RadioDial Premium Member over 1 year ago
END
The Wiz Premium Member over 1 year ago
I remember back in ’71, begging my prof to give me a D in PL-1. I promised that the closest I would get to programming would be a TI calculator. I got the D.
oakie817 over 1 year ago
now i need a cup of java
Ken Norris Premium Member over 1 year ago
Our college gave a programming course in Fortran one summer, but they didn’t have a computer to run the assignments. We had to punch the cards ourselves and then they were sent to the state university to be run. Turnaround time was about a week…
Kim Metzger Premium Member over 1 year ago
Back in college, I used to use TUTOR on PLATO. Anyone here who knows what I’m talking about?
rshive over 1 year ago
Used Fortran in my engineering work long before there were PCs.
Brian Fink over 1 year ago
Ahhh Fortran 77 back in college in the 80s
stephen callender Premium Member over 1 year ago
My first computer did not have an operating system and no high level language. Fortran was a step up
ChessPirate over 1 year ago
Many of you may not get this joke, but it was circulating back when I was a Programmer:
“Real Programmers use Assembler!”
“Real Programmers use Machine Code!”
“Real Programmers use ‘Copy Con’…” ッ
Fortran Premium Member over 1 year ago
I wholeheartedly agree about Fortran (see username). I also use it every day. :)
ChukLitl Premium Member over 1 year ago
Your a.i. twiddles its thumbs in do loops while it waits; “Press Any Key to Continue.” Come on, press a key, it’s waiting.
braindead Premium Member over 1 year ago
That’s a NOP.
ldmulvaney73 over 1 year ago
Odd, no one here admits to having ever made the mistake of putting an infinite Do loop in their Fortran programs. I did once at college and once while new at work. The computer operators weren’t happy . . .
Beowulf 406 Premium Member over 1 year ago
I hate to admitt it but I remember using FORTRAN via punch cards in my first computing class. “Creak!”
RonBerg13 Premium Member over 1 year ago
Who, commenting here, doesn’t love spaghetti.
Rob Smith Premium Member over 1 year ago
For the LIFO me, I don’t know why anyone would use GOTO.
SkyGuy over 1 year ago
Don’t forget the PEEKS and POKES.
tstuarta1 over 1 year ago
Forgot to post Saturday’s comic?
sbwertz over 1 year ago
Pascal here. Self documenting.