meta0bject

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by meta0bject 11y ago

   Scaevolus touted as an advantage the minimalism of variants of BASIC over Smalltalk and linked to such a variant lacking structured programming constructs like functions. I pointed out the flaws of that and certain other variants and ended
2. 2.▲
   by meta0bject 11y ago

   Smalltalk is that, at least for OO (though it does have lambda objects too).
3. 3.▲
   by meta0bject 11y ago

   Variants of BASIC are also unstructured and teach bad habits, such as the construction of goto-laden messes. Smalltalk by contrast is both simple (for example, having only three levels of precedence) yet also a modern, pure OO language coup
4. 4.▲
   by meta0bject 11y ago

   Since you're the creator, I'd like to ask you, why BASIC and not Smalltalk? You mention a desire to eschew boilerplate and provide instant gratification--doesn't Smalltalk provide that as well if not better than BASIC?
5. 5.▲
   by meta0bject 11y ago

   I understand that a lot of programmers started with BASIC at a time when Smalltalk was out of reach, but now that we have free, open source distributions like Squeak and Pharo, what possible advantage could BASIC still offer, other than nos