Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics > #532266 > unrolled thread

The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century.

Started byMax Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au>
First post2015-11-11 19:50 -0800
Last post2015-11-25 22:57 -0800
Articles 20 on this page of 180 — 15 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Max Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-11-11 19:50 -0800
    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 04:22 +0000
      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-12 10:05 -0500
        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 19:10 +0000
          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-13 05:52 -0500
            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-13 19:13 +0000
              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-13 19:38 -0500
                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-14 01:27 +0000
                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-14 15:55 -0500
                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-14 21:28 +0000
                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-15 10:30 -0500
                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-15 20:23 +0000
                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-16 05:42 -0500
                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-16 19:29 +0000
                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-17 05:08 -0500
                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-17 20:22 +0000
                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2015-11-17 14:16 -0800
                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-12-13 16:11 -0600
    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 08:43 -0600
      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-12 11:06 -0600
        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 19:01 +0000
      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Max Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-11-14 15:52 -0800
        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-15 01:03 +0000
          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Max Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-11-18 02:09 -0800
            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-18 19:39 +0000
              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-19 00:27 -0500
                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-19 05:40 +0000
                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-19 07:50 -0500
                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-19 18:37 +0000
                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-19 11:47 -0800
                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. "Sam Gordon" <invalid@examplll.com> - 2015-11-19 11:58 -0800
                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-19 12:21 -0800
                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-19 23:35 -0500
                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-20 07:22 +0000
                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-20 09:20 -0500
                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-20 17:47 +0000
                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-20 15:31 -0500
                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-20 21:56 +0000
                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-21 08:18 -0500
                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-21 19:02 +0000
                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-22 09:17 -0500
                                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-22 19:07 +0000
                                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-23 08:11 -0500
                                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-23 18:24 +0000
                                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-24 21:37 -0500
                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 19:08 -0800
                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 23:33 -0500
                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-25 13:44 +0000
                                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 06:25 -0800
                                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-26 15:19 +0000
                                                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-26 08:51 -0800
                                                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-27 14:06 +0000
                                                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-27 20:10 -0800
                                                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-12-15 10:00 -0600
                                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-12-15 10:21 -0800
                                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-12-15 14:18 -0600
                                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-15 20:08 +0000
                                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-25 19:12 +0000
                                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-26 15:19 +0000
                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-24 22:35 -0500
                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-25 06:08 +0000
                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-21 14:37 +0000
                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-21 18:49 +0000
                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-22 14:50 +0000
                                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-22 19:17 +0000
                                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-23 14:13 +0000
                                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-23 18:32 +0000
                                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-24 13:20 +0000
                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-24 19:38 +0000
                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-25 13:43 +0000
                                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-25 19:25 +0000
                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-22 11:03 -0500
                                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-22 19:19 +0000
                                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 11:46 -0800
                                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-22 20:27 +0000
                                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 12:58 -0800
                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-22 21:04 +0000
                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-22 19:05 -0500
                                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-23 00:59 +0000
                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 18:46 -0800
                                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-23 06:07 +0000
                                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 04:00 -0800
                                                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-23 18:37 +0000
                                                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 20:17 -0800
              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Max Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-11-19 16:07 -0800
                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-20 00:37 +0000
                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Max Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-11-22 16:28 -0800
                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-23 01:10 +0000
                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Max Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-11-25 14:13 -0800
                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-25 23:37 +0000
                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Max Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-11-29 16:17 -0800
                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-30 01:22 +0000
                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Max Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-12-03 15:12 -0800
                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-04 00:15 +0000
                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-03 23:34 -0500
                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-04 05:14 +0000
                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Max Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-12-05 17:01 -0800
                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-06 02:37 +0000
                                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-06 00:55 -0500
                                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-12-06 15:07 +0000
                                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-06 10:15 -0500
                                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-06 18:51 +0000
                                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-07 03:23 -0500
                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-12-07 13:46 +0000
                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-07 19:20 +0000
                                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Max Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-12-07 15:53 -0800
                                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-06 18:44 +0000
                                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-12-14 15:12 +0000
                                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-14 16:56 +0000
                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-12-14 13:13 -0600
                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-14 19:32 +0000
                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-14 20:47 +0000
                                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-14 21:36 +0000
                                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-14 22:33 +0000
                                                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-15 00:09 +0000
                                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-12-14 21:57 -0600
                                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-15 05:00 +0000
                                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Jürgen Großenbuch <jurgengb@adenauer.org> - 2015-12-15 15:02 +0000
                                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-14 19:13 +0000
                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-12-15 13:06 +0000
                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-15 19:31 +0000
                                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-14 22:11 -0500
                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-15 03:44 +0000
                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-14 23:04 -0500
                                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-15 05:01 +0000
                                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-15 06:36 -0500
                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Max Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-12-12 02:43 -0800
                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-12 19:18 +0000
                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-13 00:48 -0500
                                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-13 06:08 +0000
                                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-13 03:21 -0500
                                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-13 19:13 +0000
                                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-13 14:37 -0500
                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-13 20:36 +0000
                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-13 15:48 -0500
                                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-13 21:06 +0000
                                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-13 19:58 -0500
                                                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-14 01:32 +0000
                                                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-13 20:54 -0500
                                                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-14 03:15 +0000
                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-13 19:55 -0500
                                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-14 01:52 +0000
                                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-13 22:38 -0500
                                                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-14 06:07 +0000
                                                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-14 22:38 -0500
                                                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-15 05:04 +0000
                                                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-15 06:50 -0500
                                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-12-15 13:06 +0000
                                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-15 08:53 -0500
                                                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-15 19:52 +0000
                                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-15 19:48 +0000
                                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-12-15 22:12 -0500
                                                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-16 03:44 +0000
                                              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-13 20:15 +0000
                                                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-13 20:20 +0000
                                                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Jason Wyome <jasonw@hotmail.org> - 2015-12-13 20:37 +0000
                                                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-13 21:06 +0000
                                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Max Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-12-15 02:24 -0800
                                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-12-15 20:03 +0000
                        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-26 15:18 +0000
                          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Max Keon <mskeon@optusnet.com.au> - 2015-11-27 01:32 -0800
                            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-27 14:06 +0000
    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2015-11-12 15:17 -0800
      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 23:34 +0000
        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-13 05:57 -0500
          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-13 19:23 +0000
            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-13 19:53 -0500
    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. emptypost@hotmail.com - 2015-11-19 19:26 -0800
      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. emptypost@hotmail.com - 2015-11-19 19:40 -0800
    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. emptypost@hotmail.com - 2015-11-20 15:57 -0800
      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-21 00:30 +0000
        Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-20 21:53 -0500
          Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-21 07:15 +0000
            Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-21 13:46 -0500
              Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-21 19:57 +0000
                Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-21 15:50 -0500
                  Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-21 22:44 +0000
                    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-21 22:30 -0500
                      Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-22 05:14 +0000
    Re: The Case For Quick Basic In The 21st Century. emptypost@hotmail.com - 2015-11-25 22:57 -0800

Page 3 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9  Next page →


#534547

Fromdvus <dven1@adelphia.net>
Date2015-11-22 09:17 -0500
Message-ID<dbe14vFfq5fU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#534389
On 11/21/2015 2:02 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>> On 11/20/2015 4:56 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>> On 11/20/2015 12:47 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/20/2015 2:22 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't know who 'M$' is; is this an attempt to be funny?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=M%24
>>>>>> Are you laughing yet?
>>>>>
>>>>> Puerile; no.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have seen Microsloth from other puerile posters.
>>>>
>>>> Spoil-sport!
>>>
>>> I've always thought things like that were childish and branded the
>>> users of such as bigots; yes there are software bigots.
>>
>> If I were such a bigot I'd be using Linux or OS X. I started with
>> Commodore and moved to M$ when the Amiga became somewhat obsolete.
>
> My first toy computer was a MITS 8080 kit, my second an Apple II.
>
> In the day job I was dealing with VMS, RSTS, RT-11, and SunOS on
> various platforms.
>
> I always concidered the PC a toy until usefull applications appeared.
>
> Today's consumer computers are appliances to run applications.

OK, what's wrong with that?

-- 
dvus

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#534585

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-11-22 19:07 +0000
Message-ID<8dg9ic-b1h.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#534547
dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
> On 11/21/2015 2:02 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>> On 11/20/2015 4:56 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 11/20/2015 12:47 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/20/2015 2:22 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't know who 'M$' is; is this an attempt to be funny?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=M%24
>>>>>>> Are you laughing yet?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Puerile; no.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have seen Microsloth from other puerile posters.
>>>>>
>>>>> Spoil-sport!
>>>>
>>>> I've always thought things like that were childish and branded the
>>>> users of such as bigots; yes there are software bigots.
>>>
>>> If I were such a bigot I'd be using Linux or OS X. I started with
>>> Commodore and moved to M$ when the Amiga became somewhat obsolete.
>>
>> My first toy computer was a MITS 8080 kit, my second an Apple II.
>>
>> In the day job I was dealing with VMS, RSTS, RT-11, and SunOS on
>> various platforms.
>>
>> I always concidered the PC a toy until usefull applications appeared.
>>
>> Today's consumer computers are appliances to run applications.
> 
> OK, what's wrong with that?

Nothing.

Why do you jump to the conclusion that it must be a negative statement?

And you did notice the word 'consumer', didn't you?

Today  84% of US households own a computer and 73% have a computer with
a broadband connection to the internet.

What do you suppose those numbers would be if there were no applications
and all you could do is write BASIC?



-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#534759

Fromdvus <dven1@adelphia.net>
Date2015-11-23 08:11 -0500
Message-ID<dbghjoF4ol0U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#534585
On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>> On 11/21/2015 2:02 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>> On 11/20/2015 4:56 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/20/2015 12:47 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/20/2015 2:22 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't know who 'M$' is; is this an attempt to be funny?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=M%24
>>>>>>>> Are you laughing yet?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Puerile; no.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have seen Microsloth from other puerile posters.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Spoil-sport!
>>>>>
>>>>> I've always thought things like that were childish and branded the
>>>>> users of such as bigots; yes there are software bigots.
>>>>
>>>> If I were such a bigot I'd be using Linux or OS X. I started with
>>>> Commodore and moved to M$ when the Amiga became somewhat obsolete.
>>>
>>> My first toy computer was a MITS 8080 kit, my second an Apple II.
>>>
>>> In the day job I was dealing with VMS, RSTS, RT-11, and SunOS on
>>> various platforms.
>>>
>>> I always concidered the PC a toy until usefull applications appeared.
>>>
>>> Today's consumer computers are appliances to run applications.
>>
>> OK, what's wrong with that?
>
> Nothing.
>
> Why do you jump to the conclusion that it must be a negative statement?
>
> And you did notice the word 'consumer', didn't you?
>
> Today  84% of US households own a computer and 73% have a computer with
> a broadband connection to the internet.
>
> What do you suppose those numbers would be if there were no applications
> and all you could do is write BASIC?

I don't know. Besides, who wants that?

-- 
dvus

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#534847

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-11-23 18:24 +0000
Message-ID<b82cic-rmp.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#534759
dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>> On 11/21/2015 2:02 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 11/20/2015 4:56 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/20/2015 12:47 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/20/2015 2:22 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't know who 'M$' is; is this an attempt to be funny?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=M%24
>>>>>>>>> Are you laughing yet?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Puerile; no.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have seen Microsloth from other puerile posters.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Spoil-sport!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've always thought things like that were childish and branded the
>>>>>> users of such as bigots; yes there are software bigots.
>>>>>
>>>>> If I were such a bigot I'd be using Linux or OS X. I started with
>>>>> Commodore and moved to M$ when the Amiga became somewhat obsolete.
>>>>
>>>> My first toy computer was a MITS 8080 kit, my second an Apple II.
>>>>
>>>> In the day job I was dealing with VMS, RSTS, RT-11, and SunOS on
>>>> various platforms.
>>>>
>>>> I always concidered the PC a toy until usefull applications appeared.
>>>>
>>>> Today's consumer computers are appliances to run applications.
>>>
>>> OK, what's wrong with that?
>>
>> Nothing.
>>
>> Why do you jump to the conclusion that it must be a negative statement?
>>
>> And you did notice the word 'consumer', didn't you?
>>
>> Today  84% of US households own a computer and 73% have a computer with
>> a broadband connection to the internet.
>>
>> What do you suppose those numbers would be if there were no applications
>> and all you could do is write BASIC?
> 
> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
 
Congratulations, you finally got it.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#535274

Fromdvus <dven1@adelphia.net>
Date2015-11-24 21:37 -0500
Message-ID<dbkl7dF69f2U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#534847
On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>> On 11/21/2015 2:02 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/20/2015 4:56 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/20/2015 12:47 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/20/2015 2:22 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know who 'M$' is; is this an attempt to be funny?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=M%24
>>>>>>>>>> Are you laughing yet?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Puerile; no.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have seen Microsloth from other puerile posters.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Spoil-sport!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've always thought things like that were childish and branded the
>>>>>>> users of such as bigots; yes there are software bigots.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I were such a bigot I'd be using Linux or OS X. I started with
>>>>>> Commodore and moved to M$ when the Amiga became somewhat obsolete.
>>>>>
>>>>> My first toy computer was a MITS 8080 kit, my second an Apple II.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the day job I was dealing with VMS, RSTS, RT-11, and SunOS on
>>>>> various platforms.
>>>>>
>>>>> I always concidered the PC a toy until usefull applications appeared.
>>>>>
>>>>> Today's consumer computers are appliances to run applications.
>>>>
>>>> OK, what's wrong with that?
>>>
>>> Nothing.
>>>
>>> Why do you jump to the conclusion that it must be a negative statement?
>>>
>>> And you did notice the word 'consumer', didn't you?
>>>
>>> Today  84% of US households own a computer and 73% have a computer with
>>> a broadband connection to the internet.
>>>
>>> What do you suppose those numbers would be if there were no applications
>>> and all you could do is write BASIC?
>>
>> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
>
> Congratulations, you finally got it.

Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.

-- 
dvus

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#535278

FromMahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com>
Date2015-11-24 19:08 -0800
Message-ID<76626b2f-314b-4ae7-9fc4-5a3b46f98132@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#535274
On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:37:39 PM UTC-5, dvus wrote:
> On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> > dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
> >> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

<trim>

> >> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
> >
> > Congratulations, you finally got it.
> 
> Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.

Ok, Devious dvus, but please limit that to your own kids. TIA.
 
> -- 
> dvus

-- Mahipal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#535282

Frombenj <none@gmail.com>
Date2015-11-24 23:33 -0500
Message-ID<1Sa5y.150271$dL.117426@fx18.iad>
In reply to#535278
On 11/24/2015 10:08 PM, Mahipal wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:37:39 PM UTC-5, dvus wrote:
>> On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>
> <trim>
>
>>>> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
>>>
>>> Congratulations, you finally got it.
>>
>> Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.
>
> Ok, Devious dvus, but please limit that to your own kids. TIA.

Hey MyPal, lots of us kooks here love Basic. Especially those of us with 
the reduced cranial capacity that prevents the learning of a real 
language.


-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#535328

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2015-11-25 13:44 +0000
Message-ID<PM0005255DA5F42D52@aca42932.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#535278
Mahipal wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:37:39 PM UTC-5, dvus wrote:
>> On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> > dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>> >> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>
> <trim>
>
>> >> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
>> >
>> > Congratulations, you finally got it.
>>
>> Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.
>
> Ok, Devious dvus, but please limit that to your own kids. TIA.

Which language do you think is good for a first programming
language?

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#535339

FromMahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com>
Date2015-11-25 06:25 -0800
Message-ID<96c3c921-5160-42f4-aa01-6ddf1a47510c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#535328
On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 8:43:19 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
> Mahipal wrote:
> > On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:37:39 PM UTC-5, dvus wrote:
> >> On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >> > dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
> >> >> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >
> > <trim>
> >
> >> >> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
> >> >
> >> > Congratulations, you finally got it.
> >>
> >> Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.
> >
> > Ok, Devious dvus, but please limit that to your own kids. TIA.
> 
> Which language do you think is good for a first programming
> language?

Swift, Ruby, Python, C ... if all else fails, Sanskrit/Hindi.

I have younger than I friends with even younger children, Swift
leaning. Besides, Swift is just a copycat of Ruby, Python, ...

Hindi/Sanskrit is very mathematicle, you must draw a line, like in a
vector, to hang by every word. No other language compares.

Sinéad O Connor - Nothing Compares 2U - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dq2K4jHs92A

> /BAH

Hi /BAH jmfbahciv! I hope you are still not mad at or with me Me ME. I
remember you from the Jim Carr, Mati Meron, Ed Green discussion days
of science of physics on Usenet! How's your life?

-- Mahipal "IPMM... I so miss that threesome. Hanson? hanson? HANSON?!"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#535616

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2015-11-26 15:19 +0000
Message-ID<PM000525733EFAEBE0@aca20239.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#535339
Mahipal wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 8:43:19 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Mahipal wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:37:39 PM UTC-5, dvus wrote:
>> >> On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> >> > dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>> >> >> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> >
>> > <trim>
>> >
>> >> >> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
>> >> >
>> >> > Congratulations, you finally got it.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.
>> >
>> > Ok, Devious dvus, but please limit that to your own kids. TIA.
>>
>> Which language do you think is good for a first programming
>> language?
>
> Swift, Ruby, Python, C ... if all else fails, Sanskrit/Hindi.

are you serious about C?

>
> I have younger than I friends with even younger children, Swift
> leaning. Besides, Swift is just a copycat of Ruby, Python, ...

I'm not familiar with Swift nor Ruby.  Python may be OK.

>
> Hindi/Sanskrit is very mathematicle, you must draw a line, like in a
> vector, to hang by every word. No other language compares.

That's true with Chinese and Japanese characters, too.  I don't
see how you can use any of those for computing.  Communications,
yes, but not computing.

>
> Sinéad O Connor - Nothing Compares 2U - YouTube
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dq2K4jHs92A
>
>> /BAH
>
> Hi /BAH jmfbahciv! I hope you are still not mad at or with me Me ME.

I don't remember being mad at you.

> I
> remember you from the Jim Carr, Mati Meron, Ed Green discussion days
> of science of physics on Usenet!

I  miss that fun.

>How's your life?

I'm still managing.
>
> -- Mahipal "IPMM... I so miss that threesome. Hanson? hanson? HANSON?!"

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#535632

FromMahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com>
Date2015-11-26 08:51 -0800
Message-ID<693f6ec5-8add-4bd2-aca5-0ffdf4ef3dea@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#535616
On Thursday, November 26, 2015 at 10:18:23 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
> Mahipal wrote:
> > On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 8:43:19 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
> >> Mahipal wrote:
> >> > On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:37:39 PM UTC-5, dvus wrote:
> >> >> On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >> >> > dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
> >> >> >> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >> >
> >> > <trim>
> >> >
> >> >> >> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Congratulations, you finally got it.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.
> >> >
> >> > Ok, Devious dvus, but please limit that to your own kids. TIA.
> >>
> >> Which language do you think is good for a first programming
> >> language?
> >
> > Swift, Ruby, Python, C ... if all else fails, Sanskrit/Hindi.
> 
> are you serious about C?

Yes, sadly. One must learn as many languages as possible. These days I
read job posting requirements, and then I cut and paste them into my
resume/CV as skill sets. You may close your JAW up... now Now NOW!

There's FORTAN, there's C++, Java, MATLAB, Mathematics, LISP, cherry
coke, RC, ..., and then they see my age by face at the job interview.
The number of senior IT interviewers over age 30, I can count to? 0.

Like Autumn, leaves fall with the age old wind. Colors be nice.

> > I have younger than I friends with even younger children, Swift
> > leaning. Besides, Swift is just a copycat of Ruby, Python, ...
> 
> I'm not familiar with Swift nor Ruby.  Python may be OK.

Swift, limited to MAC OS so far, as far as I checked, is like only 2
or 3 years by now. Ruby is like 20+ years old. My son says he met the
Japanese author of Ruby in California, earlier this year. Ruby was
designed and developed in the mid-1990s by Yukihiro "Matz" Matsumoto.

I picked up Swift this year to keep up with all them young Asian SW
Developers (SWD) that keep shoving me out of the exit doors at all
sorts of corporations. The average age -- senior or otherwise -- of
SWD being, as I always jokingly pointed out, JustOutOfDiapers@#.

> > Hindi/Sanskrit is very mathematicle, you must draw a line, like in a
> > vector, to hang by every word. No other language compares.
> 
> That's true with Chinese and Japanese characters, too.  I don't
> see how you can use any of those for computing.  Communications,
> yes, but not computing.

Hindi is unique where words actually hang from line to line. Sometimes
my jokes go over other peoples' head and I get left hung to dry. Oye...

> > Sinéad O Connor - Nothing Compares 2U - YouTube
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dq2K4jHs92A
> >
> >> /BAH
> >
> > Hi /BAH jmfbahciv! I hope you are still not mad at or with me Me ME.
> 
> I don't remember being mad at you.

That's very kind of you. Remember the Al Gore v. Bush election days?

I'm not worth the remembering. I get told that at Bars, especially by
just about everyone not born under the sign of Aquarius. Funny that.
 
> > I remember you from the Jim Carr, Mati Meron, Ed Green discussion
> > days of science of physics on Usenet!
> 
> I  miss that fun.

I often go reread those discussions. Too bad none of them could dodge
dying of old age or boredom or something. I miss them too.

> >How's your life?
> 
> I'm still managing.

Good to hear! That's not a lot of detail, however. Anyway, peace, out.

> > -- Mahipal "IPMM... I so miss that threesome. Hanson? hanson? HANSON?!"
> 
> /BAH

-- Mahipal "IPMM... Happy Giving Thanks. Hanson? hanson? HANSON?!"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#535882

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2015-11-27 14:06 +0000
Message-ID<PM00052586752D1856@aca42324.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#535632
Mahipal wrote:
> On Thursday, November 26, 2015 at 10:18:23 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Mahipal wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 8:43:19 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> >> Mahipal wrote:
>> >> > On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:37:39 PM UTC-5, dvus wrote:
>> >> >> On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> >> >> > dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > <trim>
>> >> >
>> >> >> >> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Congratulations, you finally got it.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.
>> >> >
>> >> > Ok, Devious dvus, but please limit that to your own kids. TIA.
>> >>
>> >> Which language do you think is good for a first programming
>> >> language?
>> >
>> > Swift, Ruby, Python, C ... if all else fails, Sanskrit/Hindi.
>>
>> are you serious about C?
>
> Yes, sadly. One must learn as many languages as possible.

Sigh!  You forgot the question.  I was talking about first
programming language, not all the subsequent languages one needs to learn.

<snip>

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#536047

FromMahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com>
Date2015-11-27 20:10 -0800
Message-ID<e6367872-d892-484d-a5c3-8fad1c342e2c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#535882
On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 9:07:11 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
> Mahipal wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 26, 2015 at 10:18:23 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
> >> Mahipal wrote:
> >> > On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 8:43:19 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
> >> >> Mahipal wrote:
> >> >> > On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:37:39 PM UTC-5, dvus wrote:
> >> >> >> On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >> >> >> > dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > <trim>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Congratulations, you finally got it.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Ok, Devious dvus, but please limit that to your own kids. TIA.
> >> >>
> >> >> Which language do you think is good for a first programming
> >> >> language?
> >> >
> >> > Swift, Ruby, Python, C ... if all else fails, Sanskrit/Hindi.
> >>
> >> are you serious about C?
> >
> > Yes, sadly. One must learn as many languages as possible.
> 
> Sigh!  You forgot the question.  I was talking about first
> programming language, not all the subsequent languages one needs to learn.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> /BAH

Sigh /BAH? Seiously?! Do you really need me to explain to you anything
about CPU programming languages you don't already pretend to know all
about?

-- Mahipal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#539364

Fromgilber34 <fafa@invalid.com>
Date2015-12-15 10:00 -0600
Message-ID<n4pdei$ri6$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#536047
On 11/27/2015 10:10 PM, Mahipal wrote:
> On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 9:07:11 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Mahipal wrote:
>>> On Thursday, November 26, 2015 at 10:18:23 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>> Mahipal wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 8:43:19 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>>>> Mahipal wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:37:39 PM UTC-5, dvus wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <trim>

>>>>>>>>>> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Congratulations, you finally got it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok, Devious dvus, but please limit that to your own kids. TIA.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which language do you think is good for a first programming
>>>>>> language?
>>>>>
>>>>> Swift, Ruby, Python, C ... if all else fails, Sanskrit/Hindi.
>>>>
>>>> are you serious about C?
>>>
>>> Yes, sadly. One must learn as many languages as possible.

>> Sigh!  You forgot the question.  I was talking about first
>> programming language, not all the subsequent languages one needs to learn.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> /BAH
>
> Sigh /BAH? Seiously?! Do you really need me to explain to you anything
> about CPU programming languages you don't already pretend to know all
> about?
>
> -- Mahipal
>

what about Assembly ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#539402

FromMahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com>
Date2015-12-15 10:21 -0800
Message-ID<1c45ae6c-a374-4e86-bd27-8f9ecdfea2c6@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#539364
On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 11:00:32 AM UTC-5, gilber34 wrote:
> On 11/27/2015 10:10 PM, Mahipal wrote:
> > On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 9:07:11 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
> >> Mahipal wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, November 26, 2015 at 10:18:23 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
> >>>> Mahipal wrote:
[trim]
> >>>>>> Which language do you think is good for a first programming
> >>>>>> language?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Swift, Ruby, Python, C ... if all else fails, Sanskrit/Hindi.
> >>>>
> >>>> are you serious about C?
> >>>
> >>> Yes, sadly. One must learn as many languages as possible.
> 
> >> Sigh!  You forgot the question.  I was talking about first
> >> programming language, not all the subsequent languages one needs to learn.
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >> /BAH
> >
> > Sigh /BAH? Seiously?! Do you really need me to explain to you anything
> > about CPU programming languages you don't already pretend to know all
> > about?
> >
> > -- Mahipal
> >
> what about Assembly ?

I've never worked directly with Assembly. Skimmed it, skipped it.

My first CPU language was FORTRAN. It was the last year punched card
machines were used at the university. 

As far as a first language to learn, as /BAH was focused on, I really
don't think there is one special one. Especially not Assembly.

Students today, as young as 8, just go straight to building apps with
IDEs of their target platform of choice. Most SW developers these days
seem to build apps rather than code them. Most object oriented
languages also vehemently hide their precious source code behind APIs.

I'm now working as an independent SW Developer using Swift 2.0 in
Xcode. At my age, I am considered too old to be a young hip coder;
just like a tennis player becomes too old to keep up with the younger
crop. I don't make the GMIC Rules, I try survive despite them. Many in
my age group have had the employment door slammed behind our backs.

One reason, I follow Usenet often is that I am always working on my
Macbook. Very easy to multitask. Living the American Dream, screaming.

-- Mahipal "IPMM... GMIC==GovernmentMilitaryIndustrialC/C++/ObjC/Swift/..."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#539433

Fromgilber34 <fafa@invalid.com>
Date2015-12-15 14:18 -0600
Message-ID<n4psjn$b3$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#539402
On 12/15/2015 12:21 PM, Mahipal wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 11:00:32 AM UTC-5, gilber34 wrote:
>> On 11/27/2015 10:10 PM, Mahipal wrote:
>>> On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 9:07:11 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>> Mahipal wrote:
>>>>> On Thursday, November 26, 2015 at 10:18:23 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>>>> Mahipal wrote:
> [trim]
>>>>>>>> Which language do you think is good for a first programming
>>>>>>>> language?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Swift, Ruby, Python, C ... if all else fails, Sanskrit/Hindi.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> are you serious about C?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, sadly. One must learn as many languages as possible.
>>
>>>> Sigh!  You forgot the question.  I was talking about first
>>>> programming language, not all the subsequent languages one needs to learn.
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> /BAH
>>>
>>> Sigh /BAH? Seiously?! Do you really need me to explain to you anything
>>> about CPU programming languages you don't already pretend to know all
>>> about?
>>>
>>> -- Mahipal
>>>
>> what about Assembly ?
>
> I've never worked directly with Assembly. Skimmed it, skipped it.
>
> My first CPU language was FORTRAN. It was the last year punched card
> machines were used at the university.
>
> As far as a first language to learn, as /BAH was focused on, I really
> don't think there is one special one. Especially not Assembly.
>
> Students today, as young as 8, just go straight to building apps with
> IDEs of their target platform of choice. Most SW developers these days
> seem to build apps rather than code them. Most object oriented
> languages also vehemently hide their precious source code behind APIs.
>
> I'm now working as an independent SW Developer using Swift 2.0 in
> Xcode. At my age, I am considered too old to be a young hip coder;
> just like a tennis player becomes too old to keep up with the younger
> crop. I don't make the GMIC Rules, I try survive despite them. Many in
> my age group have had the employment door slammed behind our backs.
>
> One reason, I follow Usenet often is that I am always working on my
> Macbook. Very easy to multitask. Living the American Dream, screaming.
>
> -- Mahipal "IPMM... GMIC==GovernmentMilitaryIndustrialC/C++/ObjC/Swift/..."
>


Assembly on punch cards was very hard for me, march of death type of 
stuff, no user friendly front ends or GUIs back then.  Built a linking 
loader, about 2000 cards in a box, if one was out of sequance, kaput!

HR in most high tech companies roll you out at 45, in software some say 
it is over at 35, sad, waist of talent, but then on into consulting more 
$$$ there, but can be piecemeal.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#539429

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-12-15 20:08 +0000
Message-ID<1i86kc-l5n.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#539364
gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> wrote:
> On 11/27/2015 10:10 PM, Mahipal wrote:
>> On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 9:07:11 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>> Mahipal wrote:
>>>> On Thursday, November 26, 2015 at 10:18:23 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>>> Mahipal wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 8:43:19 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>>>>> Mahipal wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:37:39 PM UTC-5, dvus wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <trim>
> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Congratulations, you finally got it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ok, Devious dvus, but please limit that to your own kids. TIA.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which language do you think is good for a first programming
>>>>>>> language?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Swift, Ruby, Python, C ... if all else fails, Sanskrit/Hindi.
>>>>>
>>>>> are you serious about C?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, sadly. One must learn as many languages as possible.
> 
>>> Sigh!  You forgot the question.  I was talking about first
>>> programming language, not all the subsequent languages one needs to learn.
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> /BAH
>>
>> Sigh /BAH? Seiously?! Do you really need me to explain to you anything
>> about CPU programming languages you don't already pretend to know all
>> about?
>>
>> -- Mahipal
>>
> 
> what about Assembly ?

What about it?

No one uses assembly language unless they absolutely have to, and in
these days of optimizing compilers, that is not very often.

As most applications these days are graphical, the ever growing trend
is to use a drag and drop IDE to build frameworks for a high level
language.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#535420

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2015-11-25 19:12 +0000
Message-ID<eqdhic-5pm.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#535328
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
> Mahipal wrote:
>> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:37:39 PM UTC-5, dvus wrote:
>>> On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> > dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>> >> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>
>> <trim>
>>
>>> >> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
>>> >
>>> > Congratulations, you finally got it.
>>>
>>> Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.
>>
>> Ok, Devious dvus, but please limit that to your own kids. TIA.
> 
> Which language do you think is good for a first programming
> language?
> 
> /BAH

I think that depends on how you define "good".

Is the objective just to teach basic (note case) programming concepts or
is it to be the foundation for actually learning computer programming?

If it is the first, then just about any language, including the obsolete
Quick BASIC will do.

My first programming language was FORTRAN IV and the only thing I found
difficult about the class was it was on punch cards and frustrating
to correct typos.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#535618

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2015-11-26 15:19 +0000
Message-ID<PM0005257349E192BA@aca20239.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#535420
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>> Mahipal wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:37:39 PM UTC-5, dvus wrote:
>>>> On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> > dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>> >> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>
>>> <trim>
>>>
>>>> >> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
>>>> >
>>>> > Congratulations, you finally got it.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.
>>>
>>> Ok, Devious dvus, but please limit that to your own kids. TIA.
>>
>> Which language do you think is good for a first programming
>> language?
>>
>> /BAH
>
> I think that depends on how you define "good".
>
> Is the objective just to teach basic (note case) programming concepts or
> is it to be the foundation for actually learning computer programming?

Both plus learning how to use the gear and OS.

>
> If it is the first, then just about any language, including the obsolete
> Quick BASIC will do.
>
> My first programming language was FORTRAN IV and the only thing I found
> difficult about the class was it was on punch cards and frustrating
> to correct typos.

That first course was supposed to teach you how to use the hardware
and the processes to get an answer from a program :-).  I liked handling
cards; they were much better than papertape.

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#535281

FromWally W. <ww84wa@aim.com>
Date2015-11-24 22:35 -0500
Message-ID<f5aa5b58hoa61ghs22a98eugbts25g8laq@4ax.com>
In reply to#535274
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 21:37:30 -0500, dvus wrote:

>On 11/23/2015 1:24 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>> On 11/22/2015 2:07 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 11/21/2015 2:02 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/20/2015 4:56 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/20/2015 12:47 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/20/2015 2:22 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know who 'M$' is; is this an attempt to be funny?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=M%24
>>>>>>>>>>> Are you laughing yet?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Puerile; no.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have seen Microsloth from other puerile posters.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Spoil-sport!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've always thought things like that were childish and branded the
>>>>>>>> users of such as bigots; yes there are software bigots.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If I were such a bigot I'd be using Linux or OS X. I started with
>>>>>>> Commodore and moved to M$ when the Amiga became somewhat obsolete.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My first toy computer was a MITS 8080 kit, my second an Apple II.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the day job I was dealing with VMS, RSTS, RT-11, and SunOS on
>>>>>> various platforms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I always concidered the PC a toy until usefull applications appeared.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Today's consumer computers are appliances to run applications.
>>>>>
>>>>> OK, what's wrong with that?
>>>>
>>>> Nothing.
>>>>
>>>> Why do you jump to the conclusion that it must be a negative statement?
>>>>
>>>> And you did notice the word 'consumer', didn't you?
>>>>
>>>> Today  84% of US households own a computer and 73% have a computer with
>>>> a broadband connection to the internet.
>>>>
>>>> What do you suppose those numbers would be if there were no applications
>>>> and all you could do is write BASIC?
>>>
>>> I don't know. Besides, who wants that?
>>
>> Congratulations, you finally got it.
>
>Thanks. But I still like Basic as a teaching tool for young kids.

It was a false choice.

The options weren't so black-and-white since DOS 3 or earlier.

The intermittent droning about business applications (when it is
convenient to do so) similarly misses the mark.

Though not exactly QBASIC, FreeBASIC tries to preserve QuickBASIC
syntax for a reason:

http://freebasic.net/about
the FreeBASIC project originally began as an attempt to create a
code-compatible, free alternative to Microsoft QuickBASIC
...
FreeBASIC is not a "new" BASIC language. You don't need to learn much
new if you are familiar with any Microsoft-BASIC variant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 3 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web