Re: BASIC vs Python

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:29 AM, wrote: > On Thursday, December 16, 2004 6:36:18 PM UTC, abisofile wrote: >> hi >> >> I'm new to programming.I've try a little BASIC so I want ask since >> Python is also interpreted lang if it's similar to BASIC. > > Hi. > I want to know if SMALL basic is the same

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 11:29 AM, wrote: > On Thursday, December 16, 2004 6:36:18 PM UTC, abisofile wrote: >> hi >> >> I'm new to programming.I've try a little BASIC so I want ask since >> Python is also interpreted lang if it's similar to BASIC. > > Hi. > I want to know if SMALL basic is the sam

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Thursday, December 16, 2004 6:36:18 PM UTC, abisofile wrote: > hi > > I'm new to programming.I've try a little BASIC so I want ask since > Python is also interpreted lang if it's similar to BASIC. Hi. I want to know if SMALL basic is the same as/like python. -- https://mail.python.org/mail

Re: BASIC vs Python

Christos TZOTZIOY Georgiou wrote: > On 17 Dec 2004 15:53:51 -0800, rumours say that "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> might have written: > > >> The BASICs of my youth also supported graphics and sounds. > >> > >> PLAY "CGFED>CC > > >Now wait a minute, shouldn't that be... > > > >PLAY "CG

Re: BASIC vs Python

On 17 Dec 2004 15:53:51 -0800, rumours say that "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> might have written: >> The BASICs of my youth also supported graphics and sounds. >> >> PLAY "CGFED>CC >Now wait a minute, shouldn't that be... > >PLAY "CGFED>CC': 2.0} # octave modifier def play(sequence):

Re: BASIC vs Python

Andrew Dalke wrote: > /F > > import random, winsound > > Now if it only worked for my mac ... This might help: http://www.stanford.edu/~andyszy/pyper/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:30:15 +, Alan Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [Alan Gauld] > > I dunno. Here in the UK there was a small home computer called (I > > think) the Oric(*) > I'm afraid your memory fails you ... > > The Oric-1 had a keyboard with *actual* keys, and came in two m

Re: BASIC vs Python

[Alan Gauld] > I dunno. Here in the UK there was a small home computer called (I > think) the Oric(*) which had a membrane keyboard, 4K or RAM and > ran Forth.It had a small cult following before dying out. It > looked a bit like the early Sinclair/Timex ZX81 and I think the > developers came from

Re: BASIC vs Python

Tim Jarman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Alan Gauld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I dunno. Here in the UK there was a small home computer called (I > > think) the Oric(*) which had a membrane keyboard, 4K or RAM and > > ran Forth.It had a small cult following

Re: BASIC vs Python

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alan Gauld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I dunno. Here in the UK there was a small home computer called (I > think) the Oric(*) which had a membrane keyboard, 4K or RAM and > ran Forth.It had a small cult following before dying out. It > looked a bit like the early

Re: MIDI (was - Re: BASIC vs Python)

Bob van der Poel schreef: > Just as a side note, I remember reading somewhere that the Casio WK3000 > Keyboard uses Python. Not sure if that's internal or just for Casio's > own development. At the bottom it says: | 2. Python Programming Language

Re: BASIC vs Python

Jan Dries: > The funny thing is, for me, MIDI is dead old. One of my first computers, > back in 1986, was an Atari ST. It came equiped with a MIDI port. While the time I was talking about was some 3 or 4 years before 1986. > I seem to remember that even then we still had to rely on a keyboard

MIDI (was - Re: BASIC vs Python)

Jan Dries wrote: Andrew Dalke wrote: Jan Dries If you just want to play notes, you could look at MIDI. [snip] It's hard to compare that to the current era. Sound clips are much more common, it's easy to record audio, keyboards and other specialized devices are cheap, and there's plenty of mixer a

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Erik Max Francis wrote: Doug Holton wrote: I'm not going to dignify that or the rest of your note with a response. Please stop dignifying the whole group, then. Amen! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: BASIC vs Python

Andrew Dalke wrote: Jan Dries If you just want to play notes, you could look at MIDI. [snip] It's hard to compare that to the current era. Sound clips are much more common, it's easy to record audio, keyboards and other specialized devices are cheap, and there's plenty of mixer and recording soft

Re: BASIC vs Python

Jan Dries > If you just want to play notes, you could look at MIDI. I've been thinking about how to answer this and came to the conclusion I can't. I was talking about my early experiences in learning to program as a teenager in the early 1980s. I had fun messing around with sound, both to play

Re: BASIC vs Python

Leif K-Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Mike Meyer wrote: >> They do have a first-class function-like object called an agent. But >> to use a standard method as an agent, you have to wrap it. > > Just curious, but how does a method get wrapped in an agent if methods > aren't first-class object

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Max Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Doug Holton wrote: >> >> I'm not going to dignify that or the rest of your note with a response. > >Please stop dignifying the whole group, then. Seconded. This is an extremely undignified newsgroup. -- Aahz ([EMAIL PR

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Reinhold Birkenfeld wrote: Non sequitur. The phrase's interpretation depends on the posting(s) it refers to. Exactly. He was saying boo (and/or I) am offensive, but logo is not. And then he apologized for misleading me to believe he was censuring me instead of flaming me. -- http://mail.python.o

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Hans Nowak wrote: > The discussion with Logo and other languages in it was off-topic too, > but it wasn't offensive to anyone. I'm not going to dignify that or the rest of your note with a response. No, by all means, let's ignore any pieces of a post that might lead to constructive discussion.

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Doug Holton wrote: Hans Nowak wrote: Quote: "this is comp.lang.python, not comp.lang.boo." Which is obviously not the same as "Boo should not be mentioned on this newsgroup". I used the exact same phrase in another note except using the term "logo" instead of "boo", and that is the exact inter

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 16:26:57 GMT, Scott Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Speaking of Forth... > was making the point it would be good for general purpose. I suspect > that it would quickly run up against memory limitations and would go > no faster than the machine driving the memory market (wit

Re: BASIC vs Python

Doug Holton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This is comp.lang.python, not comp.lang.logo. Please refrain from > discussing topics not related to CPython. Doug, please quit trolling this newsgroup. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consult

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Doug Holton wrote: I'm not going to dignify that or the rest of your note with a response. Please stop dignifying the whole group, then. -- Erik Max Francis && [EMAIL PROTECTED] && http://www.alcyone.com/max/ San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && AIM erikmaxfrancis There was one thing I didn't

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Doug Holton wrote: > Hans Nowak wrote: >>> Quote: >>> "this is comp.lang.python, not comp.lang.boo." >> >> >> Which is obviously not the same as "Boo should not be mentioned on this >> newsgroup". > > I used the exact same phrase in another note except using the term > "logo" instead of "boo

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Hans Nowak wrote: Quote: "this is comp.lang.python, not comp.lang.boo." Which is obviously not the same as "Boo should not be mentioned on this newsgroup". I used the exact same phrase in another note except using the term "logo" instead of "boo", and that is the exact interpretation I immedi

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Doug Holton wrote: Hans Nowak wrote: You said that boo should not be mentioned on this newsgroup. Please point me to the post where I said that. Since everything is stored in Google Groups, it should be easy for you to come up with an URL... if such a post existed. Quote: "this is comp.lang.

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Hans Nowak wrote: You said that boo should not be mentioned on this newsgroup. Please point me to the post where I said that. Since everything is stored in Google Groups, it should be easy for you to come up with an URL... if such a post existed. Quote: "this is comp.lang.python, not comp.lan

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Doug Holton wrote: Hans Nowak wrote: Now you're trying to make it seem like I am against free speech on this list, and against people's rights to discuss whatever they want. I never said that, and I in fact enjoy the fact that c.l.py posters are an eclectic bunch who have knowledge of, and like

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Hans Nowak wrote: Now you're trying to make it seem like I am against free speech on this list, and against people's rights to discuss whatever they want. I never said that, and I in fact enjoy the fact that c.l.py posters are an eclectic bunch who have knowledge of, and like to talk about, a g

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Doug Holton wrote: Steve Holden wrote: 'Scuse me? This group has a long history of off-topic posting, and anyway who decided that CPython should be the exclusive focus? Even on-topic we can talk about Jython and PyPy as well as CPython. I agree with your point, although Hans Nowak and others may

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Doug Holton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I never did any such thing. So it wasn't you that posted the following? > This is comp.lang.python, not comp.lang.logo. Please refrain from > discussing topics not related to CPython. Someone must be spoofing you, then. Or you're working towards a care

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Nick Vargish wrote: Doug Holton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: If you can't accept free speech and different perspectives, you're going to be disappointed. But please do not react by trying to intimidate and troll others here. Weren't you the one telling the rest of us what's appropriate for this g

Re: What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Doug Holton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If you can't accept free speech and different perspectives, you're > going to be disappointed. But please do not react by trying to > intimidate and troll others here. Weren't you the one telling the rest of us what's appropriate for this group? Maybe yo

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:46:14 + (UTC), Alan Gauld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> was too late). A machine designed to be run on Forth would have been >> >>> unbelievably powerful from the late 70s to the mid 90s (it would be >> >>> more painful now than the x86 legacy, but still). > >A smal

What is on-topic for the python list [was "Re: BASIC vs Python"]

Steve Holden wrote: 'Scuse me? This group has a long history of off-topic posting, and anyway who decided that CPython should be the exclusive focus? Even on-topic we can talk about Jython and PyPy as well as CPython. I agree with your point, although Hans Nowak and others may not. Anything rela

Re: BASIC vs Python

"Doug Holton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Mike Meyer wrote: >> Logo (my pick) has been called "Lisp without the parenthesis". It has >> the advantage of using standard algebraic notation for formulas, >> instead of operator post or pre. >> >> > This is c

Re: BASIC vs Python

Doug Holton wrote: Mike Meyer wrote: Logo (my pick) has been called "Lisp without the parenthesis". It has the advantage of using standard algebraic notation for formulas, instead of operator post or pre. This is comp.lang.python, not comp.lang.logo. Please refrain from discussing topics

Re: BASIC vs Python

Mike Meyer wrote: They do have a first-class function-like object called an agent. But to use a standard method as an agent, you have to wrap it. Just curious, but how does a method get wrapped in an agent if methods aren't first-class objects? Subclassing the agent base class with a new run meth

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:41:00 -0600, Doug Holton wrote: > This is comp.lang.python, not comp.lang.logo. Please refrain from > discussing topics not related to CPython. This is comp.lang.python, not alt.holton.doug.doug.doug. Please spend less energy on dictating community standards and a more ene

Re: BASIC vs Python

Mike Meyer wrote: Logo (my pick) has been called "Lisp without the parenthesis". It has the advantage of using standard algebraic notation for formulas, instead of operator post or pre. This is comp.lang.python, not comp.lang.logo. Please refrain from discussing topics not related to CPyt

Re: BASIC vs Python

Michael Hoffman wrote: Gregor Horvath wrote: > Or make any given standard python object accessible from MS Excel in 2 > minutes. from win32com.client import Dispatch xlApp = Dispatch("Excel.Application") xlApp.Visible = 1 xlApp.Workbooks.Add() xlApp.ActiveSheet.Cells(1,1).Value = 'Python Rules!'

Re: BASIC vs Python

Alan Gauld wrote: A small data point here is that Sun still use Forth in their Sparc workstations. Their system prompt is really a Forth interpreter... I don;t know where the interpreter resides, presumably not in Sparc since its a RISC but interesting that they still use it. (Or they did last time

Re: BASIC vs Python

> >>> was too late). A machine designed to be run on Forth would have been > >>> unbelievably powerful from the late 70s to the mid 90s (it would be > >>> more painful now than the x86 legacy, but still). A small data point here is that Sun still use Forth in their Sparc workstations. Their syste

Re: Language fluency (was Re: BASIC vs Python)

On 19 Dec 2004 16:22:03 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aahz) wrote: > >I'm curious about that last statement. Are you saying that if you > >write, full time, code for "production", that fluency will decrease? Or > >that the nifty recent features of Python (generators, etc.) are not > >useful in "produc

Re: BASIC vs Python

/F > import random, winsound Now if it only worked for my mac ... :) Andrew [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Language fluency (was Re: BASIC vs Python)

Keith Dart wrote: > Are you saying that if you write, > full time, code for "production", that fluency will decrease? To add to Aahz's response, there are some corners of Python I learned once and decided shouldn't be in production code because it would be too hard to maintain. 'reduce' is one o

Re: BASIC vs Python

Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: >for the A above middle-C... The other A's would be: 55, > 110, 220, (440), 880, 1760... And for a while I had the first few digits of the 12th root of 2 memorized. > Granted... But it seemed the starting complaint was that Python > -- a language that tries

Re: Language fluency (was Re: BASIC vs Python)

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Keith Dart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Aahz wrote: >> >> In fact, in some ways my fluency has degenerated now that I'm >> focusing on writing code for production. > >I'm curious about that last statement. Are you saying that if you >write, full time, code for "produ

Re: BASIC vs Python

Andrew Dalke wrote: > That is, I'm looking for something that would have let me > (were I 20 years younger and just starting to program) > do one of the "songs" I made in the early 1980s where I > generated notes at random. It was something like: > > randomize > for i=1 to 1000 do >call sou

Re: BASIC vs Python

Andrew Dalke wrote: [snip] It looks like FMOD/PySonic is the closest to what I'm thinking of, and Snack coming in second. I didn't look too deeply. Most of them only play sound clips (mp3, wav, etc.) and don't have a way to specify what notes to play. If you just want to play notes, you could loo

Re: BASIC vs Python

Dennis Lee Bieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > After all, AREXX was the "VBA" of the Amiga... My first real > Python program worked with an AREXX script to handle outgoing email That's funny. My mail reader on the Amiga was an Arexx script driving the Thinker hypertext engine. It slurped u

Re: BASIC vs Python

Scott Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:41:11 -0600, Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Scott Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> Forth seems better than basic, but is *weird* (I tried it for a >>> while). I'm not sure going from Forth to C (or Python) w

Re: Language fluency (was Re: BASIC vs Python)

Hello, Aahz, Aahz wrote: myself to have "complete and utter" fluency. In fact, in some ways my fluency has degenerated now that I'm focusing on writing code for production. I'm curious about that last statement. Are you saying that if you write, full time, code for "production", that fluency will

Language fluency (was Re: BASIC vs Python)

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Adam DePrince <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I'd like to ask everybody a simple question. How many computer >languages are you completely and utterly fluent in? The reason I ask is >I'd like for everyone who has participated in this discussion to >introspect and as

Re: BASIC vs Python

OK, I'll play... > > Productive in? C, C++, Pascal (inc OP/Delphi/Kylix), Python, PL/Sql, 80x86 assembler > > Familiar enough to at least produce code in? awk, perl, Java, ksh, Lisp, Logo, VBScript, Javascript, Tcl, DOS batch, SDL > You forgot an important category here. Can debug, if

Re: BASIC vs Python

Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > Ah, but you said "standard" module for Python... The > graphics/sound extensions on your TI 99/4A were not "standard" BASIC... I assume by "standard" you mean some sort of formal standard, like ANSI Basic or ISO C? If so, well, there's no "standard" Python. What

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:41:11 -0600, Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Scott Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Forth seems better than basic, but is *weird* (I tried it for a >> while). I'm not sure going from Forth to C (or Python) would be much >> easier than Basic to C or Python.

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:41:11 -0600, Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Scott Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Forth seems better than basic, but is *weird* (I tried it for a >> while). I'm not sure going from Forth to C (or Python) would be much >> easier than Basic to C or Python.

Re: BASIC vs Python

Dennis Lee Bieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I like your categories, but you forgot one. > On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 13:54:45 -0500, Adam DePrince <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > declaimed the following in comp.lang.python: >> I'd like to ask everybody a simple question. How many computer >> languages are you

Re: BASIC vs Python

Does this one count? http://hacks.oreilly.com/pub/h/2630 "Jan Dries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Michael Hoffman wrote: > > Gregor Horvath wrote: > > > > > Or make any given standard python object accessible from MS Excel in 2 > > > minutes. > > > > from win32

Re: BASIC vs Python

"Jan Dries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Michael Hoffman wrote: > > Gregor Horvath wrote: > > > > > Or make any given standard python object accessible from MS Excel in 2 > > > minutes. > > > > from win32com.client import Dispatch > > > > xlApp = Dispatch("Excel.

Re: BASIC vs Python

Michael Hoffman wrote: Gregor Horvath wrote: > Or make any given standard python object accessible from MS Excel in 2 > minutes. from win32com.client import Dispatch xlApp = Dispatch("Excel.Application") xlApp.Visible = 1 xlApp.Workbooks.Add() xlApp.ActiveSheet.Cells(1,1).Value = 'Python Rules!'

Re: BASIC vs Python

Gregor Horvath wrote: > Or make any given standard python object accessible from MS Excel in 2 > minutes. from win32com.client import Dispatch xlApp = Dispatch("Excel.Application") xlApp.Visible = 1 xlApp.Workbooks.Add() xlApp.ActiveSheet.Cells(1,1).Value = 'Python Rules!' xlApp.ActiveWorkbook.Acti

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:41:46 +0100, Gregor Horvath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That means that you can set a breakpoint. While the debugger stops you > can edit the sourcecode (to some extent) without stopping program > execution and let the interpreter run this new code without restarting > t

Re: BASIC vs Python

Andrew Dalke wrote: Huh? I'm talking about my views of myself. I said that BASIC was a programming language I could learn without access to anyone else, on a microcomputer circa 1982. All I had was the book that came with the computer, and after a while a book on BASIC games. The machine I had w

Re: BASIC vs Python

Adam DePrince wrote: On Fri, 2004-12-17 at 09:25, Steve Holden wrote: Or make any given standard python object accessible from MS Excel in 2 minutes. What you describe is a political, not technical, challenge. What I describe is a daily costumer demand. Like or not, the world uses Excel and co

Re: BASIC vs Python

Adam DePrince wrote: > Sure you could have. There is nothing I hate more than the dumbing down > of technology for the sake of families with children. Having kids > doesn't make you dumb, it only makes you feel that way when you realize > how quickly your children's technical prowess with outstri

Re: BASIC vs Python

Thomas Bartkus wrote: > On what basis do you think the mechanics of producing a working > language are easier because the language is interpreted. Because: Type code Run code. VB6 goes a step further: Run Code Type Code That means that you can set a breakpoint. While the debugger sto

Re: BASIC vs Python

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Now wait a minute, shouldn't that be... > > PLAY "CGFED>CChttp://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: BASIC vs Python

Steve Holden wrote: Which, now I remember, Digital Equipment extended to floating-point in their FOCAL language. Never used FOCAL, or VAX Basic for that matter (was it the same thing?), but I can remember calling the VAX Basic BAS$EDIT routine from Pascal in college. BAS$EDIT had most of the b

Re: BASIC vs Python

Scott Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Forth seems better than basic, but is *weird* (I tried it for a > while). I'm not sure going from Forth to C (or Python) would be much > easier than Basic to C or Python. The biggest disappointment for > Forth was that no significant Forth chips were

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:00:54 -0600, Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >"not [quite] more i squared" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Adam DePrince wrote: >> Given the hardware constraints of the early 1980s, which language do you think should have been used instead of BASIC? >>> Lisp >

Re: BASIC vs Python

Andrew Dalke wrote: [snip] > The BASICs of my youth also supported graphics and sounds. > > PLAY "CGFED>http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: BASIC vs Python

Mike Meyer wrote: "not [quite] more i squared" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Adam DePrince wrote: Given the hardware constraints of the early 1980s, which language do you think should have been used instead of BASIC? Lisp Forth Exactly my pick Logo (my pick) has been called "Lisp without the paren

Re: BASIC vs Python

"not [quite] more i squared" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Adam DePrince wrote: > >>>Given the hardware constraints of the early 1980s, which >>>language do you think should have been used instead of BASIC? >> Lisp >> Forth > Exactly my pick Logo (my pick) has been called "Lisp without the parent

Re: BASIC vs Python

Adam DePrince wrote: Given the hardware constraints of the early 1980s, which language do you think should have been used instead of BASIC? Lisp Forth Exactly my pick -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: BASIC vs Python

Adam DePrince <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 2004-12-17 at 12:52, Mike Meyer wrote: >> Peter Hickman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > Basic has progressed much since you last looked at it, time to update >> > your facts. Basic has recursion, it compiles to native code, it has >> > objects, c

Re: BASIC vs Python

Peter Otten wrote: > Peter Hickman wrote: > > > Mike Meyer wrote: > >> BASIC as implented by Microsoft for the Apple II and the TRS 80 (among > >> others) is simply the worst programming language I have ever > >> encountered. Assembler was better - at least you had recursion with > >> assembler. >

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Fri, 2004-12-17 at 10:14, Steve Holden wrote: > >> Nobody is answering this question because they are shuddering in fear > >> and revulsion. > >> During the 1980's BASIC was the language to embedd into the ROM's of the > >> computers of the day. This was in a misguided effort to make computers

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Fri, 2004-12-17 at 12:52, Mike Meyer wrote: > Peter Hickman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Mike Meyer wrote: > >> BASIC as implented by Microsoft for the Apple II and the TRS 80 (among > >> others) is simply the worst programming language I have ever > >> encountered. Assembler was better -

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Fri, 2004-12-17 at 09:25, Steve Holden wrote: > > OK. Then please schow me, how you can create a complex form with grids, > > explorer like trees etc. in 2 minutes in standard python. Use glade. > > > > Or make any given standard python object accessible from MS Excel in 2 > > minutes. W

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Fri, 2004-12-17 at 01:49, Andrew Dalke wrote: > Adam DePrince > > During the 1980's BASIC was the language to embedd into the ROM's of the > > computers of the day. This was in a misguided effort to make computers > > understandable to their target audience. The goal of the day was to > > bui

Re: BASIC vs Python

Peter Hickman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Mike Meyer wrote: >> BASIC as implented by Microsoft for the Apple II and the TRS 80 (among >> others) is simply the worst programming language I have ever >> encountered. Assembler was better - at least you had recursion with >> assembler. > > Basic has

Re: BASIC vs Python

Christos "TZOTZIOY" Georgiou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 01:43:56 -0600, rumours say that Mike Meyer > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> might have written: >>Assembler was better - at least you had recursion with >>assembler. > You had recursion with BASIC --what you probably mean is that

Re: BASIC vs Python

"Gregor Horvath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > It's me wrote: > > Absolutely *ugly*! > > > > But still, your point is well taken. Thank you for pointing this out. > > > > Adam was right: > > > > "Don't do it, unless your goal is simply to embarrass and insult > > p

Re: BASIC vs Python

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 13:53:15 +, Gregor Horvath wrote: > OK. Then please schow me, how you can create a complex form with grids, > explorer like trees etc. in 2 minutes in standard python. > > Or make any given standard python object accessible from MS Excel in 2 > minutes. Boa, gtkglade, or

Re: BASIC vs Python

"Mike Meyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > "Thomas Bartkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The "interpreted" nature of the existing Python language has little to do > > with how it compares to other languages. Most languages, including BASIC, > > are available in

Re: BASIC vs Python

Steve Holden wrote: Adam DePrince wrote: On Thu, 2004-12-16 at 13:36, abisofile wrote: hi I'm new to programming.I've try a little BASIC so I want ask since Python is also interpreted lang if it's similar to BASIC. Nobody is answering this question because they are shuddering in fear and revulsio

Re: BASIC vs Python

Richards Noah wrote: >> You had recursion with BASIC --what you probably mean is that you had no >> stacked parameters (unless you imitated that with using an indexed >> array). >> >> 90 rem recursion >> 100 print "beautiful colours" >> 110 gosub 100 > > I think he means that you had no recursive

Re: BASIC vs Python

Gregor Horvath wrote: It's me wrote: Absolutely *ugly*! But still, your point is well taken. Thank you for pointing this out. Adam was right: "Don't do it, unless your goal is simply to embarrass and insult programmers". OK. Then please schow me, how you can create a complex form with grids, expl

Re: BASIC vs Python

Gregor Horvath wrote: It's me wrote: Absolutely *ugly*! But still, your point is well taken. Thank you for pointing this out. Adam was right: "Don't do it, unless your goal is simply to embarrass and insult programmers". OK. Then please schow me, how you can create a complex form with grids, exp

Re: BASIC vs Python

Adam DePrince wrote: On Thu, 2004-12-16 at 13:36, abisofile wrote: hi I'm new to programming.I've try a little BASIC so I want ask since Python is also interpreted lang if it's similar to BASIC. Nobody is answering this question because they are shuddering in fear and revulsion. During the 19

Re: BASIC vs Python

It's me wrote: Absolutely *ugly*! But still, your point is well taken. Thank you for pointing this out. Adam was right: "Don't do it, unless your goal is simply to embarrass and insult programmers". OK. Then please schow me, how you can create a complex form with grids, explorer like trees etc.

Re: BASIC vs Python

Gregor Horvath wrote: > Peter Otten wrote: > >> May you could give us an idea of the current state of basic affairs then >> by translating the following example snippet: > > yes you can do it in VB6, but pythons lists and dictionarys are superior > to those built in in VB and I think to those in

Re: BASIC vs Python

"Gregor Horvath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Peter Otten wrote: > > > May you could give us an idea of the current state of basic affairs then by > > translating the following example snippet: > > yes you can do it in VB6, but pythons lists and dictionarys are sup

Re: BASIC vs Python

"Christos TZOTZIOY Georgiou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 01:43:56 -0600, rumours say that Mike Meyer > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> might have written: > > >Assembler was better - at least you had recursion with > >assembler. > > You had recursion with

Re: BASIC vs Python

Gerhard Haering wrote: > In VB6, it would an exercise of working around the limitations of the > data structures. In MS Access I would probably end up with two database tables. The juxtaposition of incredibly polished and virtually unusable features is amazing. Peter -- http://mail.python.org

Re: BASIC vs Python

Gerhard Haering wrote: IIRC BASIC does have a portable language definition: ANSI BASIC, which is the old crap with GOTO and GOSUB that nobody in their right mind would want to use nowadays ... True, I forgot about that. The nearest to portable I have seen is Bywater Basic. At least it is written i

Re: BASIC vs Python

Peter Otten wrote: May you could give us an idea of the current state of basic affairs then by translating the following example snippet: yes you can do it in VB6, but pythons lists and dictionarys are superior to those built in in VB and I think to those in most other languages. It's me wrote:

  1   2   >