Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BASIC at 50

dartmouth.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 66 posts

Re: BASIC at 50

#31

Post by JetSpiegel »

munificent wrote: post #19
cmang wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder what today's generation growing up on? Immediately HTML+Javascript comes to mind, as a language interpreter that every kid's computer comes with. I would guess that is the top "first language" for kids today, with things like C#, Python, Ruby, PHP and Java somewhere in 2nd place (as popular server side and classoom languages).

JavaScript is the BASIC of today. Which means, by extension, many of today's JavaScript frameworks are the VisualBASIC of this generation: frameworks that let you use a "child's" language for grown-up work. The reactions to using JavaScript for real applications exactly parallels what people thought about VB when it came out.

This mirrors my experience.

Javascript is so basic (pun intended), it's not even considered a real language. Someone who tweaks Wordpress templates wouldn't consider himself a programmer.

Re: BASIC at 50

#32

Post by bobochan »

protomyth wrote: post #17

I miss Antic and the other magazines that came with programs to type in and modify. I learned about checksumming from those magazines :)

I spent countless wonderful evenings typing in code from Creative Computing, inCider, and Nibble. It seemed perfectly reasonable to spend a week typing and debugging to be able to play an little text adventure game.

Re: BASIC at 50

#33

Post by morganherlocker »

protomyth wrote: post #29
watmough wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, similar experience here, but when every web browser (to some approximation) includes Javascript, you can hardly say that programming is inaccessible. In most every possible way (except possibly writing files), Javascript simply wipes the floor with Basic.

Except the cost, no replacements for those cheap 8-bits such as the ZX-81, Vic 20, or Atari 400. Computer programming is less accessible than in the late 70's and early 80's.

Codeacademy seems to be the way most of my friends are getting into programming. Since you code in a sort of virtual browser, there is almost zero barrier to entry. I have seen only one person go from this to real professional programming (out of ~20), so I do not know if it really is more accessible in the ways that count, but it has been an interesting trend anyway.

Re: BASIC at 50

#34

Post by aufreak3 »

astral303 wrote: post #2

When I was little, back in post-Soviet Russia (circa early 1990's), the prevailing progression of a developer was "learn BASIC, learn Pascal, then learn C". And, if you were extra badass, you'd learn assembly. BASIC was the first step, simple and easily accessible on most computers of the day (ZX Spectrum, MSX, Atari, GWBasic/QBasic on MS-DOS). Best of all, being an interpreted language meant that you often had the s…

It was BASIC and assembly initially, on the zx spectrum (at a friend's). A gentleman introduced me to BASIC and showed me a loop with an "I = I + 1" which made me argue with him about how that cannot be true :) .... and then I suffered the permanent imperative head damage before waking up many years later.

Though the beginnig was with a blow to the head, I did enjoy the immediacy of BASIC.

(Edit: I had to change the variable to caps)

Re: BASIC at 50

#35

Post by transfire »

BASIC has been rather remarkable for it adaptability. Microsoft's Visual Basic, for instance, has managed to become a rather modern object-oriented typed language. As much flack as it gets from "real" programmers, probably more code is still written in VB than most other languages combined (although that is certainly starting to change now with the rise of open source scripting languages as well as the rise of Javascript.)

Re: BASIC at 50

#36

Post by peapicker »

vivin wrote: post #16
astral303 wrote: post #2

When I was little, back in post-Soviet Russia (circa early 1990's), the prevailing progression of a developer was "learn BASIC, learn Pascal, then learn C". And, if you were extra badass, you'd learn assembly. BASIC was the first step, simple and easily accessible on most computers of the day (ZX Spectrum, MSX, Atari, GWBasic/QBasic on MS-DOS). Best of all, being an interpreted language meant that you often had the s…

> "learn BASIC, learn Pascal, then learn C" So much of this! I remember the older kids talking about Pascal (they were using TurboPascal at the time) and to me it was some mystical, highly-advanced form of magic, a sort of "more complex" BASIC. However, I never actually learned Pascal or used it, because I jumped directly from BASIC to C (actually ended up doing both for a while). The reason I even found out about C,…

I actually had Fortran-77 between Pascal and C. C, compared to Pascal, was like taking off the handcuffs.

Re: BASIC at 50

#37

Post by peapicker »

softbuilder wrote: post #13

I'm currently reading "The Dream Machine"[1] and coincidentally at the point where BASIC is being invented. What I found interesting is how closely linked LISP and BASIC are in motivation and the spirit of the era. Not to mention the direct connection of Dartmouth, McCarthy, and time sharing. [1] http://www.amazon.com/The-Dream-Machine-Licklider-Revolution...

That book is fantastic, rates very highly on my list of excellent histories of computing.

Re: BASIC at 50

#38

Post by [deleted] »

vivin wrote: post #22
k-mcgrady wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> "I think there's a whole generation that grew up on BASIC. I wonder what today's generation growing up on?" About 6 years ago when I was in high school we were using...Pascal! During that time I actually did some work experience with Borland (creators of Turbo Pascal) and they found it hilarious we were still using it.

Ahh Borland! We used to use Borland C++ in high school (back in the late 90's).

[deleted]

Re: BASIC at 50

#39

Post by dalke »

munificent wrote: post #18
peterevans wrote: post #7

Thinking back on BASIC, what stands out most to me are the line numbers. At the time, I never understood the point; I mean, sure, you needed them for GOTO and GOSUB. But it just seemed like so much labor. And, of course, why not labels, names for subroutines? Other languages had them. But when you think back on how assembly looked and worked at the time, you realize that the line numbers are sort of analogous to addr…

> Thinking back on BASIC, what stands out most to me are the line numbers. Because in most computers at the time, you didn't have an editor that could edit an entire source file. I remember writing BASIC on a TRS-80 and an Apple IIe. Those just had line editors. Line numbers let you identify which line in the program you want to edit. Typing in: 20 PRINT "HI" meant, "replace line 20 with that". You spaced out your nu…

I both agree and disagree with you. The sticky point is "at the time." BASIC came out in 1964, and other programming languages, like Fortran, COBOL, Lisp, and Algol, didn't need line numbers for each line.

I suspect it had something to do with the display technology. Fortran and COBOL were designed with punch cards in mind. Lisp and Algol were designed for research computer scientists; I don't know what they used for I/O or hardware, but I suspect it was significantly more advanced than the line printers that Dartmouth students used.

I think this helped make BASIC a good match as the first micro language a decade later where, as you say, most of those computers couldn't handle functionality beyond a line editor.

I remember putting off RENUM as long as possible, because it forced me to re-learn where all of the useful GOTO/GOSUB targets were located.

Re: BASIC at 50

#40

Post by cleversoap »

vivin wrote: post #16
astral303 wrote: post #2

When I was little, back in post-Soviet Russia (circa early 1990's), the prevailing progression of a developer was "learn BASIC, learn Pascal, then learn C". And, if you were extra badass, you'd learn assembly. BASIC was the first step, simple and easily accessible on most computers of the day (ZX Spectrum, MSX, Atari, GWBasic/QBasic on MS-DOS). Best of all, being an interpreted language meant that you often had the s…

> "learn BASIC, learn Pascal, then learn C" So much of this! I remember the older kids talking about Pascal (they were using TurboPascal at the time) and to me it was some mystical, highly-advanced form of magic, a sort of "more complex" BASIC. However, I never actually learned Pascal or used it, because I jumped directly from BASIC to C (actually ended up doing both for a while). The reason I even found out about C,…

> how people made games

In my experience this is the common question amongst everybody (myself included) that started programming young. Some adult somewhere (how sad that I don't remember) took me seriously enough and gave me some books so I started writing in C, BASIC, and assembly and I was too stupid to realise that it was supposed to be too hard for a 9 year old.

Today (as in literally this moment in time) I am still writing C for games.

Post reply on HN