4 ms·
> This shows well what a terrible language BASIC was BASIC was conceived as a simplified, efficient, interactive equivalent to FORTRAN. Which is to say, it was
by musicale 1y ago
> This shows well what a terrible language BASIC was
BASIC was conceived as a simplified, efficient, interactive equivalent to FORTRAN. Which is to say, it was extremely useful and effective! It met all of its design goals:
Simplified: novices could learn the language in an afternoon.
Efficient: the language was suitable for fast compilation (as in Dartmouth BASIC, where it compiled and executed the program when you typed "run") and efficient enough that a single 1960s minicomputer could support dozens of interactive BASIC users, and a simple BASIC interpreter could be implemented in a few kilobytes of memory on 1970s microcomputers.
Interactive: unlike typical batch FORTRAN environments in the 1960s with decks of punched cards, the BASIC environment supported interactive entry, editing, and debugging as well as interactive execution on a print or display terminal.
Equivalent to FORTRAN: Like FORTRAN, BASIC supported algebraic function entry, and was suitable for a wide range of programs. Dartmouth BASIC supported matrix operations for numerical computing as well as string functions for text processing.
> A triumphant report by Kemeny and Kurtz indicated that 80 percent of the three incoming first-year classes who had arrived since BASIC’s invention [1964] –would have learned about computers by writing and debugging their programs.
> “Anyone who tries to convince a Dartmouth undergraduate either that computers are to be feared or that they are of little use will be met with well-founded scorn,”
https://history-computer.com/software/basic-programming-language-guide/ https://history-computer.com/software/basic-programming-lang...
BASIC was largely supplanted by other languages, but it continued to evolve into things like Visual BASIC, which became a popular rapid development environment for GUI apps. Modern BASICs support modules, objects, and other features that you might expect.
FORTRAN (now Fortran) has continued to evolve, and remains popular as a language for scientific and numerical computing, as it compiles into efficient code for CPUs and GPUs and scales from laptops to supercomputers.
- nine_k 1y agoI'm not objecting! I wrote many thousand lines of both classic BASIC (80, MSX, etc) and Fortran-66 (not even 77). Once I even wrote a BASIC version of some numerical methods assignment in a way that made it trivially easy to translate it to Fortran at the university. Modern Fortran is pretty great in its specific area, and is barely recognizable as a descendant of the ancient Fortran.
- BobbyTables2 1y agoI don’t disagree Basic had a huge impact. But we’re talking about a language that originally had no named parameters in subroutine calls… and no variable scoping. Basic almost makes assembly look good. I think the pendulum had swung too far when Basic was created.