4 ms·
I started in the 8-bit days. So learned BASIC. Then learned assembly language for the computers processor. Then next computer learn changes to the BASIC and the
by macjohnmcc 6y ago
I started in the 8-bit days. So learned BASIC. Then learned assembly language for the computers processor. Then next computer learn changes to the BASIC and the new processors assemble language. But after a point more languages became available on those computers and eventually I had to decide which was best for me to focus on. Now I try to what there is I could be learning about and decide how much about each I should learn about and how deeply. Starting now I don't know where I'd start.
- scruple 6y agoI walked a similar path and feel a similar sort of way. I'm not sure I'd have ever made it in this industry if it wasn't for the fact that I grew up when things were either simpler or had an illusion of simplicity around them that made them more approachable.
- macjohnmcc 6y agoYes there was only one path to learning which was as it happened. Now you have to figure out a good starting point looking back.
- beagle3 6y agoI did too. And I want to introduce my young children to programming, and also find that there is no obvious good modern starting point. Scratch isn't it. Python isn't it. JavaScript most definitely isn't it. I'm considering Logo and BASIC -- possibly even a BASIC with line numbers and no multiline procedures/functions. Everything modern has a huge barrier to entry for just-learned-to-read children (and the otherwise uninitiated). Assembly is easy to grok, but hard to use. Modern stuff is easy to use, but takes a while to grok. BASIC seems to hit the right spot for Beginners (All Symbolic Instruction Code).
- macjohnmcc 6y agoUse QB64 on your modern computer then they can skip the whole mess of line numbers from BASIC and still use BASIC. https://www.qb64.org/ https://www.qb64.org/