References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Which basic compiler to buy?
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 13:01:15 -0500
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 12:33:57 EST
"John Woodgate" wrote in message
> I read in sci.electronics.design that Michel Catudal
> wrote (in <email@example.com>)
> about 'Which basic compiler to buy?', on Thu, 19 Dec 2002:
> >Basic has never been seriously considered in embedded
> >environment by the industry because it is useless.
> I'm sure that a very large number of people who have used BASIC
> successfully will be fascinated to learn that.
> There must be some basic (!) defect in the human psyche that causes such
> emotional polarization.
Knowing and using many languages in the past, I find that each language
enables a 'certain' frame of mind. It is sometimes hard to gear-shift from
one lanugage to another. Eventually, the new language often becomes
the 'best.' Sometimes it is a dialect that is 'difficult' and not just the
I have had 'troubles' (on the order of a day or so) when gear-shifting even
from C to C++ and vice-versa. The two languages are lexically similar,
and when they overlap, both are syntactically similar, but the much larger C++
language is the old proverbial 'box of open Swiss Army knives, and trying
to reach for the bottom one.'
Becoming overly religious about a programming language is not helpful.