19 Sep
2014
19 Sep
'14
3:29 a.m.
On 09/18/2014 06:47 PM, Roe Peterson wrote:
Yeah, as a longtime user of BBC BASIC I was like: Hmmmmmmmmmmm
I haven't done a feature comparison, but there was an Extended basic
plus for RSTS that was damn near structured. Back in the day at the
University of Regina, a computerman named Kim Birchard wrote a
complete (and really good) version of super Star Trek with only 11
line numbers...
Line numbers in BASIC originally served dual purposes--for editing as
well as targets of code references, so the lack of line numbers when a
full-screen editor or external editor is being used is no big deal.
Lots of later BASICs (BASIC-E, CBASIC, Star BASIC) made them optional
and even allowed for alphanumeric labels.
Has anyone compared the "powerful" basics with 1962 "Card BASIC"?
There were also interactive versions of FORTRAN back in the 1960s as
well. Anyone remember IITRAN and other similar efforts?
--Chuck
Just remember -- regardless of which BASIC you're
talking
about. . . . Basic-Plus under RSTS/E transcends them all. . .
.
Wikipedia's page on it suggests it was less powerful than Acorn's
BBC BASIC!