Live data from Hacker News

BASIC was not just a programming language

gcher.com

61–70 of 121 posts

Re: BASIC was not just a programming language

#61
I feel like BASIC on my C64 was the last time I really, intuitively understood what my computer was doing when I was programming and executing software.

There are so many layers between me and the hardware today that I feel like I float above it, and that I just have to trust it all intrinsically.

I don't, really, and it constantly gives me this feeling of almost falling.

Re: BASIC was not just a programming language

#62
post #4

I agree that dropping into the basic interpreter was amazing on the old 8 bit computers. Things have really changed recently with the popularity of Retro computing as I wrote about the exact same thing around 10-15 years ago (I can't find the post unfortunately) and I was downvoted a lot as almost all the commenters seemed to think that accessing DevTools in Google Chrome and entering Javascript commands was that sam…

“It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.“ I genuinely feel that Dijkstra’s famous rant about BASIC had a big hand in killing it off. I don’t think it was the intention but it created so much bias against BASIC. If you created something in basic, or even suggested using…

> If there’s one language guilty of causing brain damage it’s surely JavaScript.

Why JS and not PHP?

Re: BASIC was not just a programming language

#63

"It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration." --Edsger Dijkstra (1975)

And yet, I learned first on GW Basic and turned out to be a halfway decent programmer.

Re: BASIC was not just a programming language

#64
post #6

> If you ran out of numbers, the renum command would recompute all the line numbers for you. This is the first time I heard of such a BASIC command, even though I grew up learning to program on a Sinclair ZX Spectrum. Which of the home computers of the time had this command? Would it renumber in multiples of 10?

RENUM was in GW-BASIC. So, any IBM "Compatible" had this for sure. It was also in Microsoft BASIC-80 so it would be in older machines as well.

The optional second argument would change the step size. The default was 10.

Re: BASIC was not just a programming language

#66
Similarly, I’ve heard some people call early Forth systems of the 1980s to be complete operating systems, which I would agree with. Many of them shipped with tiny editors, block management systems, and multitaskers. It was one of the most interesting eras of computing.

Re: BASIC was not just a programming language

#67

"It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration." --Edsger Dijkstra (1975)

As I commented in another thread, the idea of being permanently damaged by being taught the Wrong Thing is a misconception about learning. Yet most of us are where we're at by having survived many such things.

I hope Dijkstra was being humorous. I used to wear his quote as a badge of honor.

Re: BASIC was not just a programming language

#68
post #60
post #6

> If you ran out of numbers, the renum command would recompute all the line numbers for you. This is the first time I heard of such a BASIC command, even though I grew up learning to program on a Sinclair ZX Spectrum. Which of the home computers of the time had this command? Would it renumber in multiples of 10?

TI-99/4A had it, but not sure if it was included in TI BASIC or only on TI EXTENDED BASIC.

Can confirm - it worked in both.

Re: BASIC was not just a programming language

#69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.“ I genuinely feel that Dijkstra’s famous rant about BASIC had a big hand in killing it off. I don’t think it was the intention but it created so much bias against BASIC. If you created something in basic, or even suggested using…

> If there’s one language guilty of causing brain damage it’s surely JavaScript. Why JS and not PHP?

they are both guilty

Re: BASIC was not just a programming language

#70
post #4

I agree that dropping into the basic interpreter was amazing on the old 8 bit computers. Things have really changed recently with the popularity of Retro computing as I wrote about the exact same thing around 10-15 years ago (I can't find the post unfortunately) and I was downvoted a lot as almost all the commenters seemed to think that accessing DevTools in Google Chrome and entering Javascript commands was that sam…

“It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.“ I genuinely feel that Dijkstra’s famous rant about BASIC had a big hand in killing it off. I don’t think it was the intention but it created so much bias against BASIC. If you created something in basic, or even suggested using…

>impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC

As someone whose first exposure to computer programming was BASIC on an Apple II in the early 1980s when I was around 8-9 years old and who later went on to learn multiple other programming languages, I always wondered what about BASIC inspired that particular sentiment. Was it the line numbers? The GOTO statement? The use of "GOSUB.....RETURN" rather than explicit functions?

Post reply on HN