Re: Low-level vs. High-level programming (was My First Computer)

["John Moore" <butter_pat_head@jcom.freeserve.co.uk>]

"Kevin Lawton" <kepla@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:bd2p93$f8r$5@titan.btinternet.com...
> John Moore <butter_pat_head@jcom.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> | "Kevin Lawton" <kepla@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> | news:bcr0jg$ep0$5@sparta.btinternet.com...
> || Kelly Hall <hall@priest.com> wrote:
> ||| "Matthew Russotto" <russotto@grace.speakeasy.net> wrote in message
> ||| QECdnXzeWrOgUm2jXTWc-w@speakeasy.net">news:QECdnXzeWrOgUm2jXTWc-w@speakeasy.net...
> |
> | <big snip>
> |
> || Basic, which was not created to be used seriously.
> |
> | Whats your reasoning for that?  Just out of curiosity....
>
<not so big a snip>

>I was suggesting that BASIC was not suitable for
> creating serious applications in.

OK, again, with no hint of sarcasm or hostility, what is your definition of
a 'serious application' and seen somewhere else in this thread, 'complex
data structure'.

Please take note when I talk about BASIC I am not refering to standard
BASIC, but to all the different dialects of BASIC, emphasising on the later
ones, as unlike some other programming languages, BASIC has been evolving to
try to keep up with modern computing needs ever since its creation.  Did the
first ever BASIC have commands that allowed direct memory access?  I would
be slighly suprised if they did.


--
*****JCOM COMPUTER PRODUCTIONS*****
  C64, SNES, VB and other rubbish
     I want to show the world!
*****http://jcom.shorturl.com******