So the child would count "0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9."

If you use your toes to count also, you would need more chopping to count hexadecimal. Just sayin' yo'.

H&K-Guy

Algol allowed one to declare the lower and upper bound ... so one could make an array [1900:2000] or [0:23]. --- with indexing out of bounds being "caught" yielding a stacktrace (And this in the 1960's!)

Computer scientist's wife asked him to help her out. "Dear," she said "since you're going to the store, could you get us some groceries? Get us a dozen eggs, please, and if they have bananas, get two." "OK" he replied.

He came back with 24 eggs. When asked why, he said "they had bananas."

There was an article that appeared in a SciFi rag, perhaps in the 60's called "How to count on your fingers" it proposed using your digits as base 2 positional indicators allowing one to count to 2^10 == 1024 with the fingers of both hands. Geeky kid that I was, I tried it, and still use the technique occasionally

.... And this ^^ is why you don't tell computer science jokes

quote:

Originally posted by architect:
There was an article that appeared in a SciFi rag, perhaps in the 60's called "How to count on your fingers" it proposed using your digits as base 2 positional indicators allowing one to count to 2^10 == 1024 with the fingers of both hands. Geeky kid that I was, I tried it, and still use the technique occasionally

Okay, I'm a geek. I had to try that. Not to 1024, but five fingers worth...

When I went to Navy Instructor school, my lesson plan was on numbering systems. I only had a half-hour so I just skimmed the surface, but I covered the basics of binary, octal, decimal and hexadecimal.

Apparently I did okay, as 1) the school graduated me early and sent me home and 2) the token Storekeeper in the class told me he actually understood what I was talking about.

Why did the computer scientist cut his baby's little finger off?

Because he was a digit.

I've been counting by finger bones for years. Can serve as mental placeholders easy enough. Also works great for calculating elapsed time and Julian Date Code scheduling.

quote:

Originally posted by .38supersig:
Why did the computer scientist cut his baby's little finger off?

Because he was a digit.

I've been counting by finger bones for years. Can serve as mental placeholders easy enough. Also works great for calculating elapsed time and Julian Date Code scheduling.

Julian Date code scheduling ?

quote:

Originally posted by wrightd:

quote:

Originally posted by .38supersig:
...works great for calculating... Julian Date Code scheduling.

Julian Date code scheduling ?

At least for me, it helped with scheduling when it was part of my routine. Today (June 10) would be day 162. If I had a component that was cast as 04920 I could count on my fingers while keeping the conversation and tell a distributor/supplier that is was cast on February 18th of this year. Taken at face value, it doesn't really help all that much, but being able to give a timeframe between two specific casting dates just by looking at the numbers made it super easy.

quote:

Originally posted by senza nome:
Algol allowed one to declare the lower and upper bound ... so one could make an array [1900:2000] or [0:23]. --- with indexing out of bounds being "caught" yielding a stacktrace (And this in the 1960's!)

As a grown adult who has convinced myself numerous times I'm fairly well read and have solid amounts of experience in general, I don't have a fucking clue what any of this means. I applaud you even if whatever that foreign language is, is all bullshit.

Stacktrace. Going to try to work that into dinner conversation on the wife. Then I'll belittle her for having never heard of it. (she will likely checkmate me by giving me an exact definition and relevant use in her daily work.)

quote:

Originally posted by joel9507:
Computer scientist's wife asked him to help her out. "Dear," she said "since you're going to the store, could you get us some groceries? Get us a dozen eggs, please, and if they have bananas, get two." "OK" he replied.

He came back with 24 eggs. When asked why, he said "they had bananas."

So this would constitute computer nerd stuff and not a grammar issue?

Made me laugh either way.

Without thinking too hard, seems to me 1111111111 is 1023 not 1024, there is a zero taking number 1 spot so to speak.
Counting to 1024 in binary would require 11 fingers

quote:

Originally posted by senza nome:
Algol allowed one to declare the lower and upper bound ... so one could make an array [1900:2000] or [0:23]. --- with indexing out of bounds being "caught" yielding a stacktrace (And this in the 1960's!)

“The more I ponder the principles of language design, and the techniques which put them into practice, the more is my amazement and admiration of ALGOL 60. Here is a language so far ahead of its time, that it was not only an improvement on its predecessors, but also on nearly all its successors.”
— C. A. R. Hoare

Me? I like SPITBOL (an improved version of SNOBOL4).