david@ztivax.UUCP (04/01/86)
OK. We all agree (if we are reasonable) that BASIC really does suck. And, if you are making a structured assembler, you give it the things which make a useful language, like real control structures, parameter passing mechanisms, data structures, etc. Someone mentioned that BASIC is good for instruction because of its interactive environment. I think using an interpretive form of C for example, would be a much better approach. And C is easy enough to parse that an interpretor would be reasonably efficient. Oh. One other thing. When was the last (or even first) time you saw a piece of software which is either useful enough to adapt to a new application, or useless enough to need to be fixed? Therefore, I still hold that the language should be natural and not brain damaged, because sometimes even us programmers with advanced degrees, over 10 years professional experience, and IQs well over 150 need to think at the keyboard from time to time. I hate BASIC because it wasn't the first or last language I learned, but simply the worst, by far. real programmers invent new 4th generation languages, too! David E. Smyth seismo!unido!ztivax!david
crowl@rochester.ARPA (Lawrence Crowl) (04/05/86)
In article <7900004@ztivax.UUCP> david@ztivax.UUCP writes: > >Someone mentioned that BASIC is good for instruction because of its >interactive environment. I think using an interpretive form of C for >example, would be a much better approach. And C is easy enough to >parse that an interpretor would be reasonably efficient. You want to dump C on beginners? You're joking! It is difficult enough for beginning students to learn programming without problems such as: Placing "&" in front of variables for scanf but not printf unless the variable is an array. The possible multiple evaluation of "++" parameters in macro functions but not in procedure functions. The importance of making sure their strings are null terminated. And many others. There are many languages that solve BASIC's problems, while still presenting an understandable interface, such as LOGO. > >Therefore, I still hold that the language should be natural and not >brain damaged, because sometimes even us programmers with advanced >degrees, over 10 years professional experience, and IQs well over 150 >need to think at the keyboard from time to time. So why are you using C? Is it because it REQUIRES you to use all of your 10 years professional experience AND "well over 150" IQ? These are not attributes we can expect of beginning programmers! -- Lawrence Crowl 716-275-5766 University of Rochester Computer Science Department ...!{allegra,decvax,seismo}!rochester!crowl Rochester, New York, 14627