On 8/07/19 10:54 AM, Alan Gauld via Tutor wrote:
On 07/07/2019 20:54, David L Neil wrote:
(However, some of us grew-up at a time when RAM was expensive and even
in our relaxed state, such 'costs' still impinge on our consciousness -
Indeed, my first computer was at the local university and had 64KB.
My second computer was a Sinclair ZX81 (Timex in the USA?) with 16K
Wow, go you! I could never cope with using analog tape decks as digital
storage devices.
I've just decided to take a look at SBCs. I guess the 'splash' of news
about the Raspberry Pi 4 contributed to that, and yet also contributes
to my prevarication/procrastination...
My 'first' was at high school - an over-grown accounting machine.
Paper-tape program-software, Teletype-style input and 'line-flow'
output, and a magnetic drum for data-storage (and yes, I was computing
physical locations in order to optimise response times - try that!)
At uni, we built Motorola D2 Kits - IIRC an 8-bit Motorola MC6800
processor. Maybe a 6809 - or more likely, that was the one to which we
aspired. Those who could 'afford' more hardware courses started building
intelligent devices, eg embedding a microprocessor within a 'dumb
terminal'/'green screen'. Intelligent devices, Internet of Things. Plus
ça change!
My third, a CP/M machine with 64K and 256K RAM disk and dual
floppies - such luxury! :-)
Ah nostalgia.
One of my divertissements of that era (early-80s) was MP/M - a bus
network of what were effectively single-board processors. It implemented
my first 'computer lab' and we taught everything from COBOL to
accounting software and word processing on it. Fantastic stuff in its day!
(interestingly, my SBC research last night, took me to a R.Pi device
embodying exactly these concepts:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Raspberry-Pi-Combine-a-Raspberry-Pi-with-up-to-4-Raspberry-Pi-Zeros-for-less-than-US-50-with-the-Cluster-HAT.426998.0.html)
So I agree, it is hard to get out of that mode of thinking. But
today the minimum RAM is typically 4GB or more. My desktop
boxes all have 16GB and even my ancient Netbook has 4G.
My 20 year old iBook has 640M and even that is enough to
run Python with many thousands of data objects instantiated.
particularly temporary, DB tables into MySQL's MEMORY storage (and with
almost zero code-change/risk)!
Yes, I use SQLite's MEMORY facility reguilarly. Not for managing
high volumes but where I need flexible search capability.
A SQL SELECT statement is much more flexible and faster
than any Python search I could cobble together.
(appreciating that I have no difficulty moving from (Python) procedural
programming to (SQL) declarative, but many of our colleagues hate such,
and with a passion)
Yes, I've never quite understood why some programmers are
reluctant to use SQL. For complex structured data it is by far the
simplest approach and usually very efficient, especially with big
volumes. But simple searches on small datasets are easier (or as easy)
in native Python.
Agreed, but if we move beyond standard dict-s, into multi-keyed data
structures - even with PSL and PyPI at our disposal, isn't it
much-of-a-muchness to use MySQL/SQLite versus linked-lists or trees?
(or perhaps am showing too much bias from personal experience?)
The "reluctance" (good word!) is intriguing: (a) one more
package/language to learn - yet such claimants might well have been the
ones leaping into NoSQL a few years back; and (b) it is a different way
of thinking - compare 'spaghetti' and monolithic code to "structured",
procedural to OOP, OOP to 'functional'... I notice a similar likelihood
to avoid HTML/CSS because of their 'declarative' approaches.
Hey, if you don't like the green ones, that's all the more Smarties/M&Ms
for me!
(also, avoid the brown ones, they may be 'sheep pellets'/rabbit
droppings...)
--
Regards =dn
___
Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
