Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #151277

Re: [Poll] Computing favorities

From	"hqhy" <hqhy@nospam.com>
Newsgroups	alt.folklore.computers
Subject	Re: [Poll] Computing favorities
Date	2015-09-12 11:23 +1000
Message-ID	<d5hdfmFoicmU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	(18 earlier) <20150827112351.aeeafdeb4f6ee79ecc2d2d49@eircom.net> <PM00051E4B0A74CC0C@aca20dba.ipt.aol.com> <ab6eff4f-4eab-422c-a006-94cfa3a97aa6@googlegroups.com> <d4982dFnb7sU1@mid.individual.net> <msvlj1$4ph$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw


"Alan Bowler" <atbowler@thinkage.ca> wrote in message 
news:msvlj1$4ph$1@dont-email.me...
> On 2015-08-27 3:51 PM, hqhy wrote:
>> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote in message 
>> news:ab6eff4f-4eab-422c-a006-94cfa3a97aa6@googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> BASIC was more flexible with formulas.
>>
>> Nope.
>
> Yes and no.  It depended somewhat about what Fortran you
> were talking about.
>
> Fortran IV (ANSI standard) had some odd rules:
>   - a subscript was limited in complexity to
>     <constant> times <variable> plus or minus <constant>

It's quite a stretch to call that a formula, and
that is just one variant of Fortran anyway.

> Fortran II only had the arithmetic IF.

That isn't a formula at all, it’s a control structure.

Plenty of the early Basics were much more limited
than many Fortrans with control structures.

Back to alt.folklore.computers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: [Poll] Computing favorities Alan Bowler <atbowler@thinkage.ca> - 2015-09-11 18:47 -0400
  Re: [Poll] Computing favorities "hqhy" <hqhy@nospam.com> - 2015-09-12 11:23 +1000
  Re: [Poll] Computing favorities jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-12 13:24 +0000

csiph-web