|Everybody's doing it
||[Feb. 20th, 2008|09:39 pm]
albeit perhaps not quite so well.|
Yep, you're nerdier than I am.
I'm not worthy!!!!
Lynn, 60 - low ranking nerd
If you're not a nerd god, nobody is. I don't even need to look at the test to know that.
Very high, but not quite as high as sethb
. Which is about where I think I should be. (I think we both got penalized for having friends and social lives...)
You have always been a nerd.
I laughed out loud at the question about which language was not a real programming language. I think this says more about my nerdliness than anything else on the quiz. I'm not a true nerd, myself, but I do partake of nerdly nature.
I had trouble with that question. All the choices looked good to me. Is it a snobbery thing?
All the choices looked good, in that they were none of them real programming language, or in that a real programmer could write real code in any of them?
I used to tell people that I wasn't a techie, because I had to ask other people to debug my JCL. Jon Singer pointed out that anybody who had JCL to be debugged was more techie than the vast majority of the population. Time went on, I realized that I could debug my JCL all by myself, and then that contract ended. Now anybody who has JCL to be debugged is working in a really backward shop, and I no longer write code of any sort.
Oh, now I see that I could have been clearer. A real programmer could write real code in any of them. So I couldn't see which of the choices should be ruled out.
(I was a subscriber to Datamation
when the Real Programmer article
Jon Singer offered wisdom.
2008-02-21 03:57 pm (UTC)
I once had to write JCL in a shop that was using a bastard version of FORTRAN with extensions to make it more like COBOL. No shit.
I didn't last three months.
A real programmer can write FORTRAN in any language.
Unfortunately, so can a second-term student who took FORTRAN in his first term. FORTRAN in APL is not a good thing.
Fortran in APL is not a good thing, but COBOL in APL would be truly amusing.
I think it would be harder to write FORTRAN in APL than COBOL in APL, COBOL is pretty simple compared to FORTRAN (and I appear to be among others who have coded in all three languages, here!)
I wasn't referring to writing an interpreter (or compiler) for the guest language, but to writing code that looks like the guest language. FORTRAN is easy; COBOL's Environment Division might use good code under the hood.
(Adin Falkoff wrote a workspace called ENGLISH that could provide the basis for COBOL.)
2008-02-21 09:17 pm (UTC)
Oh bugger ...
Damn. I've been hanging out with the kewl kids for too long.