Please don't dig up historical comments in order to diminish someone's present-day comments or work. We can't know what has happened between then and now.
Isn't referencing a source exactly the right way to go about pointing out someone is essentially lying about their background/credentials? I'm surprised people do not care about accuracy.
Thanks! I didn't actually build it myself but a professor and other student were also involved. When I joined the project the decision was already made: the professor wanted to use APL and we were using an old CPU architecture book as reference that used APL (Gerritt A. Blaauw, Frederick P. Brooks Jr. Frend, Computer Architecture: Concepts and Evolution 1st Edition).
We almost got the PDP-11 working albeit some extensions like floating point arithmetic.
>GNU is free but pretty much abandoned. Support for Windows was (is?) nonexistent.
GNU APL was never abandoned, dev just went a long time without doing a proper release. I believe the Windows issue is just with cygwin, never looked into it since I don't use Windows.
a) “professional” writ large often encompasses academic research, even though it’s also often specifically used in contrast. Language is weird like that. Former and current academics like to have a term for all the stuff we’ve been paid to do, and we usually default to “professional experience” (though current academics do usually say “research experience” because you’re right that professional has the default connotation of corporate employment).
b) the project seems to have been over 2000 lines of APL. That’s not the “small” student project you’re implying, in any language, and in APL that’s quite substantial.
So you go through my profile and assume that you know my professional background? What makes you think that that's the only project where I've used APL?
Please don't dig up historical comments in order to diminish someone's present-day comments or work. We can't know what has happened between then and now.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44196205 and marked it off topic.
Isn't referencing a source exactly the right way to go about pointing out someone is essentially lying about their background/credentials? I'm surprised people do not care about accuracy.
Care to elaborate?
You built a CPU simulator in APL? Bloody legend! What drove that choice?
Thanks! I didn't actually build it myself but a professor and other student were also involved. When I joined the project the decision was already made: the professor wanted to use APL and we were using an old CPU architecture book as reference that used APL (Gerritt A. Blaauw, Frederick P. Brooks Jr. Frend, Computer Architecture: Concepts and Evolution 1st Edition).
We almost got the PDP-11 working albeit some extensions like floating point arithmetic.
Well, you've said you used APL professionally, but judging by https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31368299 it was in a university project.
Regarding that link
>GNU is free but pretty much abandoned. Support for Windows was (is?) nonexistent.
GNU APL was never abandoned, dev just went a long time without doing a proper release. I believe the Windows issue is just with cygwin, never looked into it since I don't use Windows.
What a wild thing to comment.
a) “professional” writ large often encompasses academic research, even though it’s also often specifically used in contrast. Language is weird like that. Former and current academics like to have a term for all the stuff we’ve been paid to do, and we usually default to “professional experience” (though current academics do usually say “research experience” because you’re right that professional has the default connotation of corporate employment).
b) the project seems to have been over 2000 lines of APL. That’s not the “small” student project you’re implying, in any language, and in APL that’s quite substantial.
2 replies →
So you go through my profile and assume that you know my professional background? What makes you think that that's the only project where I've used APL?
Such poor quality comment.
2 replies →
They described it as "a non-trivial APL application" that they worked on for two years.