Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] re:ha ha ha BASIC!

ballendo@... wrote:

> Jon wrote:
> >Well, I'm still stuck in the Pascal camp, myself. I've written
> >a couple of rather large packages in Turbo Pascal<s>I could have
> >NEVER gotten this working in plain C or (ha ha ha Basic!)
>
> Jon,
>
> Hate to see this BASIC bashing...
>
> Unless what you're saying is that you don't have the skill to
> implement the BASIC language for your programs to the degree that you
> have with pascal.

Well, when I refer to 'basic' I'm thinking of some of the old, 8-bit
micro basics from the late 70's. Some of them were pretty laughable,
like no variables passed to subroutines, 26 variables (A-Z) all global,
one cryptic command per numbered line, etc. GAG! Yes, I know
there are basics now that are vastly ahead of what was available
20+ years ago on the limited computers of that era.

Watch out! there is some of that left. I bought a single chip
micro with development system from MVS, they had a REAL
cheap 'basic' on their chip. Unfortunately, the interpreter used
up so much memory there was only space for about 20 lines of
program. And, the 'basic' looked an awful lot like a slightly
enhanced assembler language. Like, if you wanted to do
a = (b + c) * d you needed to do a=b+c on one line, and
then a=a*d on another. It turned out there were only about
12 variables available, too. But, clearly, this WASN'T
basic.

Jon