B.a.s.i.c

[Mulletino]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

Would the Sinclair QL count? With QDOS (amd SuperBASIC).

[ken70]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

Line numbers were a peculiar aspect of BASIC not used in real programming languages. Were there any 8-bits that had an inbuilt programming language that was not BASIC?

There was a machine that had forth, designed by the people behind the sinclair hardware, jupiter ace I think it was?

[ken70]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

BASIC introduced some very poor practices, such as line-numbering, but was a great introduction to programming as it was almost entirely linear. Line 10, then line 20, then line 30 then line 40 says go to line 10 etc.

and stuff worked, or it did not.. now no one has a clue what is going as as so many things are going on at once..

[ken70]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

The Windows operating system was initially designed partly in Visual Basic, at least my computer studies teacher at college told me that anyway.

Your lecturer needs to find a new job... Windows was around way before VB, VB was not even developed by microsoft, they bought it from a third party way after windows was well established.

[ken70]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

This thread has the potential to lead onto something else. Does anyone know anything about programming in Visual Basic? Someone offered me a Visual Basic programming course once for ....guess what? No less than £3800.

VB3 was a true classic, for those that grew up in the 80's home computing era - it was perfection. It had everything you needed and no bloat you didnt. it went downhill from 3 - with people who could not program loving 4, 5 and onwards to .net - as each new version abstracted development away from knowing what you are doing to knowing what to use (which mean tthose with money to buy manuals/courses/books or those in the right circles could sail by cluelessly). its a farce now, all languages are bloatware and luck designed to keep people in jobs. no skill, and slower software each year despite faster computers.

[Arran]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

Line numbers were a peculiar aspect of BASIC not used in real programming languages.

Were there any 8-bits that had an inbuilt programming language that was not BASIC?

[zabadak]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

BASIC introduced some very poor practices, such as line-numbering, but was a great introduction to programming as it was almost entirely linear. Line 10, then line 20, then line 30 then line 40 says go to line 10 etc.

[Arran]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

Was BASIC good or bad in the hands of kids in the 1980s?

I learned to program at home using proper structured programming languages and only encountered traditional BASIC with its line numbers and lack of ability to define functions some time later. In comparison to programming with a structured programming language, BASIC appeared very strange and at the time I wondered how it was possible to create complex applications software with it. Since then I have programmed microcontrollers in assembly language so I have got a feel for not having many of the features found in higher level structured programming languages that many programmers using these languages take for granted nowadays. I have thought that BASIC is actually assembly language with a collection of macros for higher level functionality of interest to home users, like graphics and sound.

[PC66]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

I don't think it could ever be said that learning BASIC was a waste of time. When the language was devised in the 1960's it was intended as a means for learning basic programming concepts, running as an interpretive language to avoid the longer compile/link/execute development cycle of the common high-level languages of the day (COBOL, FORTRAN et al), and with the ability to get something happening with only a few lines of source code, without the need to pre-declare variables, explicity specify I/O devices, declare the environment, etc. To that end, I think it served well, so was something of a natural choice to include when the home microcomputer revolution came along in the 1970's/80's, albeit that it then spawned numerous subtle - and incompatible - extensions as each manufacturer tailored the language to its own particular hardware.

I don't think that really mattered too much to the average home user, and even for many business users. For example, how many small businesses going for computerization in the 1980's ran something like a Commodore 8032 with printer and dual disk unit using accounts packages entirely custom-written in Commodore's own variant of BASIC?

The addition of more structured programming elements helped many emerging programmers start to learn that aspect of coding: Visual BASIC, Acorn/BBC BASIC with its addition of declared procedures, etc.

Speaking of BBC BASIC, some 30 years ago I started using a BBC Microcomputer and making use of its versatile I/O facilities to control various electronic projects. The ease of throwing together some quick code in "basic BASIC" (if you'll excuse the expression!) for some task coupled with the extensions in Acorn/BBC BASIC which gave easy direct access to hardware ports made it ideal for such use, and machines such as that are still extremely useful (and still being used) in that role today.

And as has already been mentioned, VB really had quite a following for a while as a major development language, and we saw the move to compiled BASIC. I don't doubt that some of today's up & coming programmers might well regard VB et al as being "old hat," but I think they sometimes don't realize just how much could actually be achieved with a reasonably good machine and a decent programming language and set of development tools say, 20 years ago. Many of them certainly have no concept of efficient programming.

But even for anyone who learned BASIC (of whatever variant) but has since abandoned it for other languages, I still don't think it could be said to have been a waste of time.

[philipdalton]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

Remember doing computer studies at school and trying to learn basic on the BBC, was never much good though (never had the patience back then). As for it being a waste of time I see where you're coming from but I can't really agree because a lot of brilliant programmers started their careers from this point. Without basic we would probably never be at the point we are today, we have to start from somewhere after all.

The Windows operating system was initially designed partly in Visual Basic, at least my computer studies teacher at college told me that anyway.

[spuggybridge]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

Remember doing computer studies at school and trying to learn basic on the BBC, was never much good though (never had the patience back then). As for it being a waste of time I see where you're coming from but I can't really agree because a lot of brilliant programmers started their careers from this point. Without basic we would probably never be at the point we are today, we have to start from somewhere after all.

[philipdalton]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

I've got Blitz Basic, which games are written in, off the back of a magazine but unfortunately I've never got around to using it.

[HG]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

This thread has the potential to lead onto something else.
Does anyone know anything about programming in Visual Basic?
Someone offered me a Visual Basic programming course once for ....guess what?
No less than £3800.

Yes, I've done some in Access Databases, largely self taught and using online forums and resources.

[philipdalton]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

This thread has the potential to lead onto something else.
Does anyone know anything about programming in Visual Basic?
Someone offered me a Visual Basic programming course once for ....guess what?
No less than £3800.

[philipdalton]

Re: B.a.s.i.c

If anyone's still got a Sinclair ZX Spectrum try this and see what happens:

10 For A=0 To 7
20 Border A
30 Next A
40 Goto 10

I think that's how you do it, but with my memory not being that brilliant I might've got it wrong