|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Tom LakeTom Lake Date: Aug 26, 2007 00:27
> The most recent IBM Basic compiler that have is Version 1, for the PC,
> from the early 80's. And it was written by Microsoft. Is there any
> later?
There was a version 2.0 released which had two complete, boxed manuals.
It also had the ability to generate PCjr code! Woo Hoo!
Tom Lake
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: ArarghMail708NOSPAMArarghMail708NOSPAM Date: Aug 26, 2007 02:08
On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 03:26:03 -0400, "Tom Lake" twcny.rr.com>
wrote:
>
> NOT.AT.Arargh.com> wrote in message
>news:mfm1d3dciq3mhspaa56qumv3vmrnipj04s@4ax.com...>> On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 19:35:57 -0400, "Tom Lake" twcny.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>...
|
| Show full article (2.11Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: R.NicholsonR.Nicholson Date: Aug 26, 2007 02:38
On Aug 26, 12:26 am, "Tom Lake" twcny.rr.com> wrote:> NOT.AT.Arargh.com> wrote in message
>
> news:mfm1d3dciq3mhspaa56qumv3vmrnipj04s@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 19:35:57 -0400, "Tom Lake" twcny.rr.com>
>> wrote:>
>> Yes. Some which would be useful in any version of basic:
>> MAT ZER clear an entire array
>> MAT LET copy an entire array
>> MAT READ read an entire array
>> MAT WRITE write an entire array
>
> Try telling that to Nicholson! For some reason, he won't add
> MAT READ or MAT PRINT to his BASICs.
|
| Show full article (1.15Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: R.NicholsonR.Nicholson Date: Aug 26, 2007 02:53
On Aug 25, 4:35 pm, "Tom Lake" twcny.rr.com> wrote:>> On Aug 25, 4:29 pm, "Judson McClendon" sunvaley0.com> wrote:>>> I believe the fundamental BASIC syntax is
>>> superior to either of these other languages. For example, VB still has a
>>> complete do/loop structure, where the 'while' or 'until' phrase may be
>>> placed after the 'do' or after the 'loop', but none of the other
>>> languages provide this full gamut.
>
>> But that's *not* a "fundamental BASIC syntax" at all! Several early
>> BASICs had no DO or WHILE loop equivalent - all they had was
>> FOR...NEXT.
>
> It's in the de jure (ANSI/ISO) standard for BASIC, not the de facto
> standard.
|
| Show full article (1.24Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: newsnews Date: Aug 26, 2007 02:57
On Aug 26, 12:35 am, "Tom Lake" twcny.rr.com> wrote:> It's in the de jure (ANSI/ISO) standard for BASIC, not the de facto
> standard.
I know you would wish it to be otherwise, but the ANSI/ISO BASIC
standards are as irrelevant to this discussion as they are to any
other. In any case I doubt that the 1978 standard, which is the only
one which might apply to a discussion of BASIC's 'fundamentals',
included any looping constructs other than FOR...NEXT, did it?
The BASIC I am most involved with and know most about was originally
developed in 1981. At that time FOR...NEXT was the only looping
structure in most BASICs; BBC BASIC was one of the first to add
anything else (REPEAT...UNTIL, and later WHILE...ENDWHILE).
When did any other kind of loop first appear in a Microsoft BASIC?
Richard.
http://www.rtrussell.co.uk/
To reply by email change 'news' to my forename.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: newsnews Date: Aug 26, 2007 03:05
>>The ms basics, at least 7.1, had EXIT FOR/DO and NEXT I and various
>>other loop control items like that, so you are wrong there, I afraid.
>
> The EXIT keyword appears to have been around since at lease QuickBasic
> Version 2.
Please read my message again. I referred to "'break' and
'continue'" (note AND not OR). Of course I am perfectly well aware
that many BASICs have the equivalent functionality to 'break' (EXIT)
but I don't know of any that have the equivalent functionality to
'continue', other than by using a GOTO.
I'm sure I don't need to remind you that I have been writing BASIC
interpreters for 25 years so I do have a reasonably good level of
knowledge on the subject!
Richard.
http://www.rtrussell.co.uk/
To reply by email change 'news' to my forename.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Tom LakeTom Lake Date: Aug 26, 2007 03:06
> When did any other kind of loop first appear in a Microsoft BASIC?
I know PDS 6.0 had DO LOOP. Does anyone know of an earlier
implementation?
Tom Lake
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: newsnews Date: Aug 26, 2007 03:12
On Aug 26, 11:06 am, "Tom Lake" twcny.rr.com> wrote:> I know PDS 6.0 had DO LOOP.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Stephen J. RushStephen J. Rush Date: Aug 26, 2007 12:12
> Please read my message again. I referred to "'break' and
> 'continue'" (note AND not OR). Of course I am perfectly well aware
> that many BASICs have the equivalent functionality to 'break' (EXIT)
> but I don't know of any that have the equivalent functionality to
> 'continue', other than by using a GOTO.
FreeBASIC has CONTINUE in DO, WHILE and FOR loops.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: ArarghMail708NOSPAMArarghMail708NOSPAM Date: Aug 26, 2007 14:19
On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 03:05:17 -0700, "news@ rtrussell.co.uk"
rtrussell.co.uk> wrote:
>>>The ms basics, at least 7.1, had EXIT FOR/DO and NEXT I and various
>>>other loop control items like that, so you are wrong there, I afraid.
>>
>> The EXIT keyword appears to have been around since at lease QuickBasic
>> Version 2.
You got the attributions wrong. Try again.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
RELATED THREADS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
