4 ms·
respectfully, that's missing the point. The beauty of the BBC Micro is the stark hardware specification -- the limits are the point. That scarcity leads to dif
by jackhack 10y ago
respectfully, that's missing the point.
The beauty of the BBC Micro is the stark hardware specification -- the limits are the point. That scarcity leads to different usage, different behavior, different learning patterns.
If one wants to go poking around with modern languages, multi-tier applications, color-coding IDEs, etc. there is no shortage of modern computers available.
But instead, if one wishes to learn the fundamentals of computing, and the joys of working around the limits to extract the most performance possible, I would argue the BBC Micro is a superior choice to modern systems inherently due to the low spec.
It was a mere 40 years ago that 16kbyte of RAM was a luxury item.
IIRC, Wozniak wrote Applesoft Basic interpreter in 2k for the Apple ][ ROMs. He lost the source, re-wrote it, and saved a few bytes.
Learning assembly was a necessity for the purpose of speed and efficiency (which are often inseparable). Understanding what's happening at a low level -- all the way down to the metal -- is key. Single thread. No real OS. Flat memory model, all addressable (anyone remember the fun of self-rewriting code? or direct-memory mapped graphics or I/O ?)
I've rambled enough. Hopefully I've made a point.
- JoeAltmaier 10y agoI remember small machines. A PDP11 got hung and the manager called me. I thought a bit, talked him through the debugger and got him to put in a jump to avoid a check. Hit RUN and back in business! We don't do things like that anymore.
- scoot 10y ago> respectfully, that's missing the point. On the contrary, it seems you have missed my point, or at least, nothing that follows that statement directly contradicts it. Speaking of which, you state that the BBC micro:bit (the BBC Micro was a very different computer) is good for education, which I would certainly hope, since that's what it was designed for. However suggesting that teaching assembly language to 11 year olds is a good way to encourage them to explore and engage with the platform is missing the point (of the micro:bit).
- dragonbonheur 10y agoHigh Level language statements can be easily translated to ARM assembly language(http://www.toves.org/books/arm/ http://www.toves.org/books/arm/), easier than x86 in my opinion. 11/12 year olds should have no problem understanding it, after they've played around with the provided options for programming the micro bit. (https://www.microbit.co.uk/create-code https://www.microbit.co.uk/create-code)
- jackhack 10y agoscoot, I offer my apologies. You are correct -- I read too much into what you said (limitations on bluetooth due to RAM scarcity), and took off on a tangent.
- TD-Linux 10y agoI agree that the BBC Micro would be a great learning computer. The gap between a hobby program and commercial software is small - you don't get the training wheels feeling as with some other environments. Unfortunately the Micro:bit is not self hosting and not at all a suitable replacement for the BBC Micro, in my opinion.