Hacker News Reader

Comment by fcbrooklyn | Hacker News Reader

I don't think they mean "old" programmers exactly... more like "programmers back in the day". We just didn't have the quality of tools back then. Also, our machines were orders of magnitude less powerful, which meant we generally had to work with a lot less in the way of things like library support, frameworks, etc. I used to have an OS/2 box as my build machine. I think that box had 32k of RAM, and 4.7Mhz processor.

View on HN

Yes, not nearly the quality of tools. When I was programming back then I programmed much closer to the cpu (less abstraction through libraries and less automated tools). This made me look much closer at the issues listed above. I also ready full books on the programming language and command sets. Unlike now, if I use a new library/language, I just scan the online docs to get the gist of what I need to do.

So I guess I had the opposite experience.

Yeah, I did all those things as well. They were essential. And yet I would say that at least 50% of the bugs we ran into were either buffer overflows, stack overflows, using freed pointers, not freeing pointers, or incorrect pointer indirection. At least we didn't have to worry about race conditions.

Yes, precisely. I count myself as one of them. SO and other things online provide a minimum quality level for many solutions, and we didn't have that a few years ago. So you did what you could with the meager time and resources available.

Your boss must have really hated you to have you run OS/2 on 32k of RAM at 4.7MHz. I didn't even know that was possible.

Oops! 32 Meg, not K. 4.7 is correct I think though.

That machine was probably worth about 3-4 grand at the time (1992)

4.7 mhz is probably not correct. That was the speed of the original 8088/8086 machines (IBM PC 5150 class, etc.)

You would need at least a 386 to support 32 megs of RAM. Those were at least 16 mhz.

Could have been under-clocked by (div 4) just to torture people into writing efficient code.

Heh... see, it was the distant past, fading from my memory. You're absolutely right. The machine in question was an early pentium box as I recall, and the fastest machine I'd ever used at the time.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com