Re: Rewrite BASIC language today?

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:37:37 +0100, jj wrote:

> Hi, if BASIC were to be written today, what changes would you have made,
> if any, consistent with the meaning of the acronym? I am thinking about
the
> physical limitations and the pressures to make the language like some of

> it's
> now little used competitors.
> 
> For example, I have always wondered why those "doit" instructions - 
> FOR/RETURN/
> DO/WHILE etc are not all part of one instruction with several
parameters.
> 
> Some of the differences between different BASICS are surely unnecessary
and 
> not
> consistent with the original basis for it's creation.
> 
> Perhaps sales of BASIC are not to or for beginners anymore? Perhaps the 
> "educational" factor
> once used to sell the language is not of much interest?
> 
> Has modern BASIC evolved into a development language for experts?
> 
> jj

This is a really interesting thread. Personally it doesn't really matter
to
me if all BASICs conforms to a standard or not. It is, I think, im****tant
that there is a standard to use as a starting point, but to be honest, a
basic BASIC is more or less useless to me. Currently I use PureBasic which
has pretty much anything I need right now, and whatever it doesn't have, I
can create on my own. The learning curve was reasonably short for me,
unlike pascal, C, C+, C++, Java, even .NET stuff. Mileage may vary, but
for
me, getting the job done is far more im****tant than is it standard. The
additional power available in PureBasic is occasionally very welcome. Like
LB the visual designer is a very useful RAD bonus as well. 

This is just opinion, but part of what makes a language useful to me as a
developer, is what tools does it come with.

-- 
HK