________________________________
From: Toby Thain <toby at telegraphics.com.au>
Well, there is the "small" problem that BASIC
syntax, data types, and control structures relate poorly to modern languages and even less
to powerful >abstractions. There's not such a huge distance between Fortran and
BASIC!
?A well known fact in some circles. And this is why they both bloody rock! Both are dead
easy to get started in (alright most FORTRANs I know of make you format your code
properly, but what's wrong w/that for a beginner's language?). BASIC let's you
be more sloppy (not so good a thing). I don't know about melding FORTRAN w/assembler,
probably no more difficult then in BASIC, and which of us didn't get into that w/our
Commy 64s and cheap pc's?
?For most people assembler is something of a dog to learn, especially on your own (but I
did it w/the right text - yes text, not something typically found on bookstore
bookshelves. Self teaching yourself assembler w/something by Sam's or whatever was a
total exercise in frustration). But those that stuck it out found that all that crap sort
of "clicked" 6 months to a year down the road. Granted if you started w/BASIC,
and I was very young, the "hardest" part (it seemed) was having to send
directives to the assembler. It was just a pain to me. It's almost the same every
friggin time (though not always). I guess I was just lazy and spoiled and has something
less then an ideal background (er, in BASIC). I just wanted to get down and dirty. Spare
me the details.
?But as for data types, control structures, etc. in BASIC, who needs that w/an
introductory language? A lot of people would get turned off if bogged down in all that. If
you're in your early teens anyway.
What's wrong with Scheme? Or at worst, Python? At
least the kids learning today might learn something that still serves them in 10, 20
years. It's not like the >world is moving back towards BASIC...
?Oh if I had my way, every computer would have BASIC in firmware or on disk. You betcha.