the evolution of programming languages from 1950 to 1970 putting into considerable issues,product and concept?
106774
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_programming_languages
724677
Trick question - C _is_ the most popular programming language.\nWell to be honest, Java and VB are probably more popular in general (i.e. including home user hobbyists), but in the industry you'll find that C/C++ are more widely used.\n\nRawlyn.
120606
It all depends what you are trying to accomplish.\n\nI’m 65 and began programming in the very early 1960s.  During the early years I programmed in more than a dozen different computer languages, but over time increasingly move into pure systems work and then business consulting (which I still do) and finally owning my own businesses. For me that evolution was correct, but it didn’t take long to lose my edge with programming.  If you are going to stay in programming you are best served (in my opinion) to remain as up to date as possible.\n\nThis field changes so quickly (it did even when I began) that it is difficult to stay up with it at any point.  For me working on the development of leading approaches to programming specialized applications (for me it was applications for manufacturing environments) was a good path because breaking new ground got your name around the industry.  Job offers were always available.\n\nI don’t know if such helps this day and age or not.  In my experience I used what I learned to start my own business and that was more satisfying than everything else.
915504
Second Generation Computers (1956-1963) \n\nThe invention of Transistors marked the start of the second generation. These transistors took place of the vacuum tubes used in the first generation computers. First large scale machines were made using these technologies to meet the requirements of atomic energy laboratories. One of the other benefits to the programming group was that the second generation replaced Machine language with the assembly language. Even though complex in itself Assemly language was much easier than the binary code. \n\nSecond generation computers also started showing the characteristics of modern day computers with utilities such as printers, disk storage and operating systems. Many financial information was processed using these computers. \n\nIn Second Generation computers, the instructions(program) could be stored inside the computer's memory. High-level languages such as COBOL (Common Business-Oriented Language) and FORTRAN (Formula Translator) were used, and they are still used for some applications nowdays. \n\nThird Generation Computers (1964-1971) \n\nAlthough transistors were great deal of improvement over the vacuum tubes, they generated heat and damaged the sensitive areas of the computer. The Intergreated Circuit(IC) was invented in 1958 by Jack Kilby. It combined electronic components onto a small silicon disc, made from quartz. More advancement made possible the fitings of even more components on a small chip or a semi conductor. Also in third generation computers, the operating systems allowed the machines to run many different applications. These applications were monitored and coordinated by the computer's memory. \n\nFourth Generation (1971-Present) \n\nFourth Generation computers are the modern day computers. The Size started to go down with the improvement in the integerated circuits. Very Large Scale(VLSI) and Ultra Large scale(ULSI) ensured that millions of components could be fit into a small chip. It reduced the size and price of the computers at the same time increasing power, efficiency and reliability. "The Intel 4004 chip, developed in 1971, took the integrated circuit one step further by locating all the components of a computer (central processing unit, memory, and input and output controls) on a minuscule chip." \n\nDue to the reduction of cost and the availability of the computers power at a small place allowed everyday user to benefit. First came the minicomputers, which offered users different applications, most famous of these the word processors and spreadsheets, which could be used by non-technical users. Video game systems like Atari 2600 generated the interest of general populace in the computers. \n\nIn 1981, IBM introduced personal computers for home and office use. "The number of personal computers in use more than doubled from 2 million in 1981 to 5.5 million in 1982. Ten years later, 65 million PCs were being used." Computer size kept getting reduced during the years. It went down from Desktop to laptops to Palmtops. Machintosh introduecd Graphic User Interface in which the users didnt' have to type instructions but could use Mouse for the purpose. \n\nThe continued improvement allowed the networking of computers for the sharing of data. Local Area Networks(LAN) and Wide Area Network(WAN), were potential benefits, in that they could be implemented in corporations and everybody could share data over it. Soon the internet aand World Wide Web appeared on the computer scene and formented the Hi-Tech revolution of 90's.\n\nFifth Generation (Present and Beyond) \n\nFifth generations computers are only in the minds of advance research scientiets and being tested out in the laboratories. These computers will be under Artifical Intelligence(AI), They will be able to take commands in a audio visual way and carry out instructions. Many of the operations which requires low human intelligence will be perfomed by these computers. \n\nParal
643036
C is very often referred as "System Programming Language" because it is used for writing compilers, editors and even operating systems. C was developed and implemented on the UNIX operating system on the DEC PDP-11, by Dr, Dennis M. Ritchie. C was evolved during 1971-73 from B language of Ken Thompson, which was evelved(in 1969-70) from BCPL language of Martin Richards.\n During 1979-1983 BJARNE STROUSTRUP wrote C++, an object oriented Language at AT&T BELL labs, C++ was early known as "C with Classes". It is almost backward compatible with C. The first version of C++ was used internally in AT&T in August 1983.\n       In October, 1985 first commercial implementation of C++ was released.\n         C++'s style , especially function prototype declaration infulenced ANSI C.
66275
In the 1950's (and, evidently, also the 1970's), it was diagramming.\n\nNowadays, it's not diagramming but parsing.  Parsing uses terms like Noun Phrase or NP, and Verb Phrase or VP.\n\nParsing is illustrated at the link below:
1052536
Ruby is interesting. I've been learning it for only a week. Its big thing is that it's completely object oriented. Just about everything is an object in some way. The language is "fun" in a weird way. It's not a structured as Java. It allows for many cool and powerful algorithms, but takes a bit to get used to. If you want to try it out, use http://tryruby.hobix.com/ That is the coolest thing I've ever seen to learn any programming language.
1119400
Ummm...that is probably not going to find an intelligent answer in "Programming & Design".  Try re-posting this in say, "Society & Culture" and you may get an intelligent answer.
422403
First generation language was purely numerical machine code, meaning binary strings standing for a series of instructions often intermixed with data, it was the only way to Program the real first Generation computers that were developed around the 1950's. These were built from electronic valve technology. Consequently they were large, consumed a great deal of electrical power, and were not reliable enough for continuous operation.
925175
The question is so broad its difficult to know where to start.\n\nDepending on the programming languages you are using, there are usually a multitude of Integrated Development Environments (IDEs) available. These help you organize and package your source codes. Some "languages" are more math and engineering oriented (like MathCAD and MATLAB.) There are also a number of Computer-Aided Design packages available.
957410
Actually mainframes are coming back after being downsized (no pun). The older room size mainframe is gone, however the more and more big firms are returning to the mainframe theory, better sucrity, central location, custom software.  Check out the last item from IBM web page,, CNN recently did a write up on the mainframe. It is now a smaller supercomputer. \nTrick is in the older days there where a half dozen languages on mainframes, some very privately written code. Most airlines wrote their own code. So what mainframe language do you want to learn?  Go to IBM.com, or Unisys.com and read up. Or just type in mainframes in google. \n    There will be an expanding market in progrmming for mainframes, however how large will the market be??\n    Two things to learn before worring about a course in mainframes, learn C++ and learn Unix / linux as they both will help you to jump onto another programming language. \n\n p.s the room behind me used to have bus and tag cables with a halon system in the roof, now it runs hundreds of servers. I bet in the near future mini's (AS400) types will be in there.\n\nCarl
446168
Are there languages which allow a keyword to be\naccepted as an identifier.\n\nYes, most of the old (incomprehensible) languages did that (like PL/1) i think but i'm not sure, i'm not very used to obsolete languages)....\n\nAh, so modern languages like C are "comprehensible"? Perhaps you should spend some time looking at the submissions to the Obfuscated C contests.\n\nEveryone loves to give PL/I examples like:\n\nIF IF = THEN THEN THEN = ELSE ELSE ELSE = END END\n\n[Actually IF IF = THEN THEN = ELSE; ELSE ELSE = END; END -John]\n\n(which I think is valid PL/I - it's been years, but it's at least close) but that simply proves that you *can* write incomprehensible code in PL/I. So? Show me a language in which you *can't* write incomprehen-sible code.\n\nWhat gets forgotten in all this is the *reason* PL/I didn't reserve its keywords. The PL/I designers knew they were designing what was, for its time, a very large language, which was intended to be useful to very different groups of programmers. History lesson: PL/I and the 360 series were developed at the same time. Originally, PL/I was intended\nto be *the* programming language for the 360. Before the 360, IBM and others in the business had two lines of machines, one for business (for IBM, the 1400 series), one for scientific work (the 709x). Business machines often did decimal arithmetic, had instructions for string manipulation, BCD support, and such, and were programmed in languages like COBOL. Scientific machines usually used binary arithmetic, supported floating point, and were programmed in languages like FORTRAN (US) and Algol (Europe). One fundamental idea in the development 360\nwas to have one line of machines to serve both markets. PL/I was similarly intended to replace both COBOL and PL/I. One of the great comments of the era was that a committee of COBOL and FORTRAN experts sat down to design PL/I - and came up with a language that looked more like Algol than either. \n\nSince PL/I was large and served disparate markets, it was likely that most programmers would only be familiar with a subset of the language. Experience with COBOL - which had a long list of keywords, all reserved  - showed that avoiding all the keywords was a headache. It would be even more so if you had to avoid keywords that only applied to parts of\nthe language you didn't know. So the PL/I designers made the deliberate decision to avoid reserved keywords. Rather than criticizing as incomprehensible a language you know nothing about, take a look at it and find places where the language was made ugly or artificial to avoid reserving keywords. I'll bet you have a lot of trouble doing so.\n\nLest you think that long lists of (reserved) keywords is a feature only of obsolete languages, I suggest you look at the list for C++. I believe C++ reserves more keywords than PL/I had - and perhaps as many as COBOL at its worst did. (Certainly, modern C++ is a larger language the PL/I ever was.)\n\nOver the years, another cost of reserved keywords has become apparent: It becomes difficult to extend the language. You're faced with the Hobson's choice of adding a new readable keyword, thus breaking existing correct code; adding an unreadable keyword that's unlikely to conflict\nwith existing code; or reusing some existing keyword for a new purpose. There's often a bias toward the last of these -and you can see the results in languages like C and C++, where keywords like static and virtual have a variety of only very loosely related meanings.\n\nI suspect the main reason people have generally reserved keywords is two-fold: Language "style" has become fixed, and people want to use lexers and parser generators. Language "style" is hard to pin down, but it's clear that, whatever C "style" is, it's been a big winner - C and\nJava both have C "style". However, C "style" isn't compatible with non- r
947670
here is a nice site...\nhttp://www.oldsoftware.com/ibm.html
89049
COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM August 1998/Vol. 41, No. 8 63\nNearly a decade of Workshops on Information Systems and Economics\n(WISE) have examined a wide range of research topics.\nThese include a number of what could be termed “demand-side” topics, which focus on the\neffective use of information technology, such as IT-induced changes to markets, and “supplyside”\ntopics, which focus on the efficient provision of IT resources. Software engineering economics\n(SEE) spans both groups, but it has generally been the most dominant topic within the supply\narea. While the economics of hardware have been relatively ignored in the management\nresearch literature, given industry’s ability to continually provide\nfaster, smaller hardware at ever-decreasing prices, software has been an\nentirely different matter. Software costs continue to be significant, and\nindustry’s understanding of how to reduce them has improved only very\nslowly in contrast to hardware. This dilemma has merited a significant\namount of research attention, and the consequent research findings tend to\nhave important practical applications.\nChris F. Kemerer\nProgress, Obstacles, and\nOpportunities in\nSoftware Engineering\nEconomics\nPressing demands from industry suggest more attention\nshould be focused on this critical area.\nA d v a n c e s i n S o f t w a r e E n g i n e e r i n g E c o n o m i c s\nAlso in contrast to some of the demand-related\ntopics, SEE research commonly has a significant\ntechnological component to it, since much of the\nresearch is focused on evaluating promising new\ntechnologies or approaches to software development.\nThis diverges with much demand-side work, which\ntends to be closer to traditional economics research.\nTherefore it requires some skills and knowledge of\nboth the software engineering and economics disciplines.\nAccordingly, it has also attracted some\nresearchers from the software engineering area\nwithin computer science, whose work will also be\nreflected in this review, and in the suggestions for\nfuture work. This combination of skill requirements\nalso tends to make research in this area comparatively\ndifficult, and suggests one reason why we\ndon’t see more research in this important area.\nPractitioners are most concerned about understanding\nwhat aspects of software engineering innovations\nhave worked best and whether they are\napplicable to their particular situation. This motivation\nalso lies at the heart of most SEE research. In\naddition, with the huge growth in the packaged\nsoftware industry, more attention has been focused\non software as an economic good.\nObstacles to Progress\nA number of factors militate against observing\nprogress in software engineering in general, and software\nengineering economics in particular. Software\nengineering focuses on the production of software,\nwhich is by its very nature a relatively intangible\ngood. Objectifying and measuring its many dimensions\nare often challenging to researchers. Even in\nsituations where we have relatively good softwarerelated\nartifacts to examine, there may be little evidence\nto examine concerning the process by which\nthey were constructed.\nEven if there were good access to project data,\nthere is another significant confounding factor. The\nnumber and complexity of applications for software\nhave grown very rapidly, fueled, in large measure, by\nthe dramatic improvements in hardware technology.\nAs hardware decreases in size and increases in performance\nper dollar, more applications can be justified.\nThis then creates demand for software. While\nthis tremendous demand for software has fueled the\nfortunes of many software developers and their organizations,\nit provides significant challenges to\nresearchers as we attempt to assess progress in the\ndelivery of software. Since the applications have\nchanged as well as the tools, it becomes very difficult\nto assess the impacts of these new tools. It may well\nbe the c
1043410
A monumental task!\nHope yur not the sole programmer.\nI recommend staying with standard C or Cobol\nA comprehensive telecom billing system will atke you years to write.
739075
I code almost exclusively in ASM and binary for most CPU architectures out (very old through new), and haven't gone insane because of it. Thats not to say I wasnt insane before I started programming. :)
898401
An extinct concept. It was last seen in the 1950's.