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 >>> Forth >> Exactly my pick > >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. > > <mike I *thought* that some sort of logo was pushed by Atari (for the 400/800 series) as an educational language. It also seemed to be more for kids, and emphasized "turtle graphics" (which I hadn't heard of since till seeing the python module that does that as well). I suspect that this was exactly the type of marketing to keep anyone (especially kids) from looking at it. 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 made (and none until it 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). Assembler has all the vices you mentioned (the only abstractions you get are the ones you code yourself), with the extreme virtue of knowing *exactly* what the computer is doing. If you want to learn on a 80's machine, assembler has a lot to say for it. Scott Robinson -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
