🚀 go-pugleaf

As for
those who can't write but won't use such tools, or worse, who don't know
they can't write; who don't know a principle from a principal: phooey on
yooey.  Here's my extended (tongue firmly in cheek) reply:

ARE ONLINE SYSTEMS HELPING TO PROLIFERATE BAD CODING?

Before online development systems existed, important programs were
usually hand-keypunched and hand-corrected, often in several drafts,
before being run.  The keypunching of the program represented a
finalizing and codifying process which encouraged well thought-out
algorithms.  Care needed to be taken, since a single error could
necessitate re-running the entire job.

There is a hidden risk in the new systems, in that they have enabled us
to bypass the correction and finalizing phases of coding, often
resulting in quick and efficient execution of poorly planned, sloppy,
and confusing code.

In systems programming, where complex and potentially important
algorithms are implemented, clearness of expression is obligatory.  I
could cite, nevertheless, many examples where bad coding has rendered
programs unintelligible and algorithms obscure.

Compilers tend to be very quick to correct us on points of syntax, but
very slow to correct, or even recognize, inaccuracy or inefficiency of
algorithms in our own or others' code.

While I do not advocate abandoning the CRT for 029's and ASR 33's, I do
encourage readers to take the time to proof and revise any of their
programs meant to implement important algorithms.

Re-read your code, and have others examine it for efficiency, absence of
kludges, and general comprehensibility, before you submit it to any
computer.  Remember that online compilers are only tools, and that the
burden of effective implementation and testing still rests upon those
who use them.

--Bruce

------------------------------
 
Date: Wed, 14 May 86 08:23:18 mdt
From: ihnp4!lanl!crs@hplabs.ARPA (Charlie Sorsby)
Subject: Word Processors, Electronic Mail & Writing

          In a recent issue of Computers and Society Digest, the ques-
          tion

          "ARE WORD-PROCESSING AND ELECTRONIC MAIL HELPING  TO  PROLI-
          FERATE BAD WRITING?"

          was asked.  I believe the answer is yes and no.

          These, and other, electronic tools make writing  easier  and
          so  help to proliferate writing, both good and bad.  In this
          sense, at least, the answer is yes.

          I believe that many slip-shod writers will  continue  to  be
          slip-shod  writers  in spite of electronic tools.  But, many
          careful writers will continue to be careful, and may  become
          more  so,  because  of  these  tools.   There  are  probably
          border-line cases where a writer will slip from one category
          to  the  other  as  a result of some characteristic of these
          tools.

          WORD PROCESSORS:

          (I include, in this category, text editors such as vi)

          It seems to me that, rather than proliferating bad  writing,
          these  tools  encourage  good writing by the ease with which
          corrections and revisions can be made.  I know that my writ-
          ing has been improved by use of a text editor.

          Using a typewriter, I tend to make  corrections  of  glaring
          errors but minor errors are often allowed to slip by because
          of the relative difficulty of making the correction.  With a
          text editor, I correct all errors that I find.

          My favorite thing to do with a typewriter is to make a  mis-
          take  near  the  end  of  the  page.   Unless  it  is easily
          corrected with correction fluid or it is a serious error, it
          *stays*.   Revisions are very time consuming when drafts are
          hand written and final copy is typed.  Even if someone  else
          is  typing  the  material, the cost of corrections and revi-
          sions is considerable.  I think there is  a  resulting  ten-
          dency to edit as little as possible.

          With a word processor or a text editor, on the  other  hand,
          corrections  and revisions are much easier.  I think editing
          is, therefore, encouraged, and writing  improved,  by  these
          tools.   Spelling  checkers  are  another tool that improves
          writing.

          I have mixed  feelings  about  style  analyzers  though.   I
          suspect  that  users  may not be critical enough when inter-
          preting the "suggestions" made by  style  analyzers.   There
          may  be too much of a tendency to thoughtlessly accept these
          suggestions "because the computer said so."

          Another possible problem with electronically produced  writ-
          ing  is the fact that a typical video  display doesn't  show
          a full (typewritten) page of text.  I believe that this  can
          cause a lack of coherence in writing  produced by electronic
          means.  I discuss this below.

          ELECTRONIC MAIL:

          Here, I agree that some gawd-awful stuff passes for writing.
          I  suspect  that electronic mail is more analogous to quick,
          hand-scribbled, notes than to formal mail.  I  know  that  I
          have  a  tendency  to think of it that way.  I don't know if
          better user interfaces would help  or  not.   It  may  be  a
          psychological problem.

          One contributing problem is, I think, the limited expanse of
          the video display.  This is especially a problem when reply-
          ing to electronic mail.  It is difficult to reply coherently
          to  something  that  you  can  no longer see.  I'm sure that
          those with good memories find this less of a problem than  I
          do.   Perhaps the answer is dual-crt terminals :-)/2.  Seri-
          ously, that would be a big help for me.  Replying to  e-mail
          is difficult for me because I can't view the original and my
          reply at the same time.  This can also be, albeit less of, a
          problem  with  the  original  document  because with typical
          video displays, one sees less than a full page of  text.   I
          would  like  to  see  terminals  &  word processors with the
          aspect ratio of the display reversed (i.  e.  portrait  mode
          rather  than  landscape mode) and with the necessary resolu-
          tion to display a full page of text.

          I think that electronic mail is definitely an area where bad
          writing  is proliferating.  If electronic mail is considered
          to be the equivalent of a quick, hand-scribbled,  note,  the
          seriousness of the problem is arguable.  Those who would use
          e-mail for more  formal  purposes,  though,  would  be  well
          advised to make a conscious effort to avoid "scribbling."

          Charlie Sorsby
                  ...{cmcl2, ihnp4, ..}!lanl!crs
                                          crs@lanl.arpa

------------------------------
 
Date: Wed, 14 May 86 10:30:25 pdt
From: Jim Reid 
Subject: Re: A Computing and Society news group

[I just had to include this... -- Dave]

In article <148@comp.lancs.ac.uk> David England writes:

>I'd like to vote for a Computing and Society news group (net.csr ?)
>as suggested by Dave Taylor , the moderator of the current mailing list.

I vote for this too. Maybe it should be uk.csr or eunet.csr? With all the
rampant ramboism in most "political" postings from across the Atlantic, I
don't know if a csr group would be acceptible on a net-wide basis.

				Jim

[I realize this isn't supposed to be a political discussion group, but it
 sure is an interesting statement about the differences between America
 and other countries...]

------------------------------
 
Date: Wed, 14 May 86 10:30:25 pdt
From: Dave Taylor <taylor@hplabs>
Subject: Broadening this digest a bit...

A few propositions for you'all;

	1. We're going to have this group gatewayed into a legitimate
	   news group finally - so I've been thinking about a possible
	   change to the format, namely to toss the digest format entirely 
	   and have each message simply added to the group.

	2. Also, there has been a lot of interest in having the group tie
	   in somehow with the Computing and Social Responsibility groups
	   around the world  --  I was thinking of allowing some postings
	   from those groups assuming that they aren't too political (as
	   I'd rather avoid our group falling into the inevitable jingoistic
	   battlefield that all emotional topics like politics would make it).

If anyone has any complaints, suggestions, kudos, or (!!) POSTINGS (!!) please
let me know.

   I'd also like to hear from CSR people...

					-- Dave
------------------------------
 
Date: Thu, 15 May 86 10:16:33 edt
From: Alex Colvin <mac%virginia.csnet@csnet-relay.ARPA>
Subject: computers & writing

Comments on Computers and Society "Digest", #21, Effects of computers on
writing...

>From "Utopia of a Tired Man" collected in "The Book of Sand", Jorge Luis
Borges, Norman Thomas di Giovanni, trans.
An encounter with a man in the future:

    "Now you are going to see something you have never seen," he said.  He
    handed me a copy of Thomas More's "Utopia", published in Basel in the
    year 1518; leaves and pages were missing.

    Somewhat foolishly, I answered, "It's a printed book.  At home I had
    over two thousand of these, though they were neither as old nor as
    valuable as this one." I read the title aloud.

    The man laughed. "No one can read two thousand books.  In the four
    centuries I have lived, I haven't read more than half a dozen.
    Besides, rereading, not reading is what counts.  Printing -- which is
    now abolished, since it tended to multiply unnecessary texts to the
    point of dizziness -- was one of man's worst evils."


-----------------------------------

To have your thoughts included in this digest, or to join the mailing
list, please send electronic mail to Dave Taylor at any of the following
addresses:

   taylor@HPLABS.{CSNET,ARPA   -- or -- 	..hplabs!taylor

This digest is published approximately bi-monthly and does not necessarily
express the views of HP nor anyone else other than the individual authors
of the messages.

***********************************
End of Computers and Society Digest 
***********************************