From: John Woodgate
Subject: Re: Which basic compiler to buy?
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:06:25 +0000
Organization: JMWA Electronics Consultancy
Reply-To: John Woodgate
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:06:38 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: Turnpike (32) Version 4.01 <5Z8C9wtxbnpWyFnyfFzqmVF739>
I read in sci.electronics.design that Dave Martindale
wrote (in ) about 'Which basic compiler to
buy?', on Fri, 13 Dec 2002:
>How can you write a readable program with only 1 and 2
>character variable names? More than that, and you're no longer
>using standard Basic.
But there are many other BASICs that don't have these limitations. You
might just as well deprecate English because Anglo-Saxon doesn't have a
word for 'microprocessor'.
>Basic was designed as a toy language that students could learn very
>fast. It shows.
No, not a toy, at least, it isn't a toy even if it was intended to be.
I am no programmer, but I've modified others' BASIC progs to do contour
plots of magnetic fields, return-loss plots of telecoms products,
'linear' d.c. power supply design etc., etc. All running on BBC Micros
with 32 K (yes K) of RAM and a 4 MHz 6502. The contour plots took hours,
but that's better than no plots at all, if you need them.
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!