Re:Lost Lessons from 8-Bit BASIC
by laumars on Tuesday September 02, 2014 @10:24AM
(#8257719)
> There was no such distinction. That's recasting of the facts into something understandandable today.
But that's the whole bloody point of the article. If you have an issue with that then take it up with the author rather than me.
Please also remember that the Bourne Shell is as old as BASIC micro computers. So my comparisons are of two environments of the same age rather than older systems vs modern systems (like you keep accusing me of).
And around the same time some micro computers (even the lower end ones) would support other interpreters (eg the BBC Micro supported BBC Basic, LISP, LOGO, Fortran, and a few others) and you could switch between languages like you switch shells in Linux. Which is also why I like to make the distinction between the language and the shell.
> Know why the language keywords were so short? Because in an 8K ROM the symbol table was a significant hit on resources. Add a keyword? Means remove some other feature. It was a whole different world, with different constraints. And still it was usable, accessible, friendly even.
I know - I was there. And while it's interesting, it's also irrelevant to any of mine or the authors points.
But that's the whole bloody point of the article. If you have an issue with that then take it up with the author rather than me.
Please also remember that the Bourne Shell is as old as BASIC micro computers. So my comparisons are of two environments of the same age rather than older systems vs modern systems (like you keep accusing me of).
And around the same time some micro computers (even the lower end ones) would support other interpreters (eg the BBC Micro supported BBC Basic, LISP, LOGO, Fortran, and a few others) and you could switch between languages like you switch shells in Linux. Which is also why I like to make the distinction between the language and the shell.
> Know why the language keywords were so short? Because in an 8K ROM the symbol table was a significant hit on resources. Add a keyword? Means remove some other feature. It was a whole different world, with different constraints. And still it was usable, accessible, friendly even.
I know - I was there. And while it's interesting, it's also irrelevant to any of mine or the authors points.