In defence of C (was:Re:Anybody else tried FreeBasic (aka fbc)?)

[John Macdonald]

On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 03:21:12PM -0400, Alex Beamish wrote:
> On 10/12/05, Lennart Sorensen <lsorense-1wCw9BSqJbv44Nm34jS7GywD8/FfD2ys at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 04:36:15PM -0400, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> > > Amazingly enough, the original BASIC (at Dartmouth College) was an
> > > incremental compiler. Each line was separately compiled, as it was
> > > entered, to machine code! I think that that is the reason for the odd
> > > (crude) variable naming rules -- all variables existed (26 x 11
> > > numeric variables were possible).
> > >
> > > PS: I played with a later version of that BASIC implementation in
> > > 1967. Mind you, I had no idea about compilers until perhaps year
> > > later. What I was impressed with was time sharing (using a Teletype
> > > terminal). Previously, I had mostly done batch computing with
> > > turn-around measured in months.
> >
> > Hmm, I underestimated the age of basic it would seem. I thought it was
> > from the 70s some time.
> 
> 
> Well, I was fooling around with BASIC on a high school teletype machine
> starting in Fall 1973, and it was not at all new by then .. it was a pretty
> standard language that was used on quite a few systems.
> 
> Of course, my Dad got me addicted by showing my little bits of APL code, and
> by road-testing an IBM 'portable' called the 5100 that did both APL and
> BASIC. It was called a portable because .. it had a handle. That unit
> weighed 50-60 pounds, and would only have fit on Andre the Giant's lap.

That category of machine was generally referred to as luggable
rather than portable - by anyone who had ever ported one.

-- 
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml