
Programming in the early days of the computer age - DanBC
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38103893
======
DanBC
This article is about one woman's experiences with EDSAC.

There's some more information about EDSAC here:
[http://ledr.luon.net/documents/2R930/edsac/the-
edsac.pdf](http://ledr.luon.net/documents/2R930/edsac/the-edsac.pdf)

The WWG is more formally known as _The Preparation of Programs for an
Electronic Digital Computer_. (I think.) Here's an Archive link:
[https://archive.org/details/programsforelect00wilk](https://archive.org/details/programsforelect00wilk)

~~~
ue_
It's very interesting how numbers are stored, such that the MSB says if the
numeric value would be equal to -(1-x). Apparently numbers are also all within
the range -1 <= 0 < 1\. So you get things like:

    
    
      0 1100 0000 0000 0000 = 0.75
      1 1100 0000 0000 0000 = -(1-0.75) = -0.25

------
Philomath
I remember going to the computers section at the London's Science Museum a
couple years ago and being fascinated by mechanical calculators and the first
computers.

It's so amazing to see how fast computers have evolved but it makes me wonder
if computing was more interesting back then because of all the things that
were yet to be discovered or now that everything is connected and anyone can
access information and do anything with a 200$ laptop.

~~~
analog31
Granted, I don't go all the way back to the early days, but learned to program
in 1981. I think a possible change is that our expectations for software have
escalated, so that the learning curve is longer because of the complexity
needed to manage things like UI, networking, and graphics.

Programming was more fun for me in those days, and today I gravitate to
programming tasks that don't involve writing commercial quality apps.

Back then, you could easily make software that looked like commercial software
-- albeit with fewer features -- because everything was just a text display.
Today, if you say "I want to learn programming because I'm interested in
games," well you've got a long road ahead of you to make something that
doesn't look lame.

It's just that in the past everything looked lame. ;-)

This may explain the appeal of things like Arduino and Raspberry Pi, where
projects don't need an elaborate skin and high performance in order to be
interesting and cool.

~~~
digi_owl
The crazy thing is that, particularly with games, the number of actual
programmers have stayed pretty much the same, but the number of artists etc
has downright exploded.

At the same time the quality of the games may well have stagnated or even
regressed.

~~~
RodgerTheGreat
AAA games are like Hollywood blockbuster action movies: They're _insanely_
expensive to make, so investors and studios are less likely to take risks. The
mainstream gaming industry also caters to far broader demographics than ever
before, so the streamlined common denominator is simpler, less nuanced and
more homogenous.

In "indie" lower-budget games there's a tremendous amount of innovation and
creativity. There's also a lot of derivative cash-in crap. No worse than any
other creative discipline, I think. One gem of a game makes up for thousands
of failed attempts.

~~~
digi_owl
I just wish that the distribution system of choice didn't involve me having to
put all my eggs in some corporate controlled basket. I can live with losing a
game or two because of me mistreating the storage media etc. But right now i
risk losing access to all purchased games because of error on some server
somewhere.

------
zeristor
Nice piece about early software to solve some astrophysics problems

