Re: Brin: BASIC for kids
Thanks Alberto. Hoping kidbasic will do some good. Now an alert to all brinellers! Catch the premiere of my NEW HISTORY CHANNEL SHOW -- The ArchiTechs! PREMIERE: Wednesday, October 11 at 11:00 PM REPEATS: October 12 at 3 AM October 14 at 11:00 AM (See: http://www.history.com/shows.do?action=detailepisodeId=192813 ) Here is what the History Channel says about this bold new show: Five geniuses are challenged: innovate fire rescue and evacuation tools for skyscraper disasters... and do it in 48 hours! Watch a small team of designers and visionaries form a high-tech think tank, racing the clock to shape bold, over-the-horizon designs for the future. With unprecedented cooperation from New York's regional fire departments, episode#1 culminates in a dramatic presentation to Former FDNY Commissioner Thomas Von Essen, one of the heroes of 9/11 If ratings are good, this exciting series will send our dynamic (and handsome) team tackling rapid innovation makeover challenges, ranging from spaceflight to eco-power to creating the next humvee. (We went zooming around the desert, interviewing Special Forces, dissecting hummers, then created a wholly new design, all at behest of a four-star general.) Help spread the word about this breakthrough in entertaining and smart/informative television! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC for kids
David Brin wrote: Thanks Alberto. Hoping kidbasic will do some good. But there isn't a Mac version - not yet. Now an alert to all brinellers! Catch the premiere of my NEW HISTORY CHANNEL SHOW -- The ArchiTechs! My cable got The History Channel just a few months ago - but I will have to wait until they dub and subtitle it. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
On 9/23/06, Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maru wrote: The Wikipedia entry for R is under GNU-S :-) I hate to play the pedantic resident Wikipedia expert here, marudubinski, I presume :-) You forgot the Dr.! ...(Nah, I'm kidding.) Ok, but if we want to use the search engine from the initial page, it's much simpler to search for GNU-S then to search for R :-P Alberto Monteiro Certainly, but how many people know of it as the GNU implementation of the S programming language (or is it family now? Doesn't seem very clear) rather than as the R programming language? Google hits prove nothing of course, but R programming language gets ~50,300,000 ghits and GNU-S ~3,910,000 (I'm not including hits for GNU S, since looking over the top 20 shows it to be a rather ambiguous term, but even GNU-S's first hit is for the mail reader Gnus). ~maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
Maru wrote: The Wikipedia entry for R is under GNU-S :-) I hate to play the pedantic resident Wikipedia expert here, marudubinski, I presume :-) but it's actually at [[R (programming language)]] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_%28programming_language%29), like it should (since programming languages' whose name are ambiguous are supposed to be disambiguated rather than be at [[R programming language]], which could be misleading). Now, [[GNU S]] and [[GNU-S]] do indeed redirect to the actual article, but that's not the same thing as the article being at those names... Ok, but if we want to use the search engine from the initial page, it's much simpler to search for GNU-S then to search for R :-P Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
I don't know if this has already been suggested, but I have recently learned the programming language R, and it seems that it's exactly what you would like to use to teach your kids how to use a computer: (a) it's free and available for _all_ systems [M$, Linux, Mac] How about the good olde Apple ][, C64, or some other prehistoric computers? Wouldn't Logo be a better choice? OTOH, on more modern computers, one might teach the child OOA and OOP with some Smalltalk system. (b) it's simple to use Logo's simple to use as well. Smalltalk even simpler, especially if it comes to debugging. (c) it's powerful enough to treat numerical data Hm, never trated large amounts of numerical in Logo. Bit boring for children, no? Smalltalk, OTOH, can treat numerical data (even arbitrary fraction with no rounding errors, or arbitrary precision FP data), and it can do even _fully_ object-oriented! Ok, if you want complex arithmetic built-in, Python might be an option as well. For example, if you want to show the plot of a point, you just start R and type: plot(10, 10) That's overkill. For such simple tasks, I use a pencil. Don't teach your children how to perform stupifyingly simple takes with the aid of technological overkill! and it plots a small ball at coordinates (10,10). If you want then to add another point, just type: points(12, 12) For the price of a computer, I could buy a room full of balls! and the plot will be updated, showing the two balls. [notice that the first plot fixes the size of the graphic window, so points will only show points inside the picture]. Yup, the balls in the room would also be visible from the outside, though the window. Of course, rtfm and you will see that _much_ more can Balls often come without manuals, but they also can be used for a multitude of activities, including soccer, basketball, smashing of windows, attacking penguins, thwrowing at apples, whatever! Best regards, Klaus ;-) _ This mail sent using V-webmail - http://www.v-webmail.orgg ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
Klaus Stock suggested: OTOH, on more modern computers, one might teach the child OOA and OOP with some Smalltalk system. From... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smalltalk Because of that the meaning of Smalltalk expressions using binary messages can be different from their traditional interpretation: 3 + 4 * 5 is evaluated as (3 + 4) * 5, producing 35. No, I don't think Smalltalk is a good teaching device :-P Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Klaus Stock suggested: OTOH, on more modern computers, one might teach the child OOA and OOP with some Smalltalk system. From... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smalltalk Because of that the meaning of Smalltalk expressions using binary messages can be different from their traditional interpretation: 3 + 4 * 5 is evaluated as (3 + 4) * 5, producing 35. No, I don't think Smalltalk is a good teaching device :-P Yup, that's why I wrote that algebra works object-oriented 8as opposed to math-oriented). ;-) OTOH, consider the following Smalltalk code: x := 1 / 3. x := 3 * x. x inspect. Common sense tells us that the result is 0.999 - but Smalltalk insists on 1. Yes, mathematical reality is nowadays defined as what the pocket calculator says. This is one more of the points where electronic assistence becomes a problem - kids don't really learn math with the assitance of computers, they are just drilled like a assembly line worker or a circus animal, just repeating the standard number entry trick they learned. Anyway, I meant Smalltalk not for teaching mathmetics, for for the teaching of object-oriented analysis and object-oriented programming (and, to some extent, also for OOD). Instead of drawing balls on a screen, kids could learn how to define a Ball class, how to add behavior and how to communicate with Ball instances (myball := Ball new. myball color: red. myball moveto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] myball bounce.). If someone could learn how to define reasonable and meaningful abstraction of given problems, we would have to endure a lot less of that crap which is programmed about everywhere. For example, Java, a language designed by someone who had not the slightest clue about object-orientation. Oh yes, there are things called classes and methods, but they are, in reality, mostly just modules and procedures. With the result that software development in Java takes as much time as it would in C++. Best regards, Klaus _ This mail sent using V-webmail - http://www.v-webmail.orgg ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
Hi brinellers! Glad to see you still in business! I am very sorry to have neglected you in favor of that darned, time-consuming blog. http://www.davidbrin.blogspot.com/ In part because the political issues are so important/urgent right now that I'll grab any influence where I can get it. Of course see news at http://www.davidbrin.com and watch out for my new History Channel show in November. As for the article that just appeared in Salon, whew! Let me append below my canned response after receiving HUNDREDS of emails (not including more hundreds that came into Salon Slashdot!) Thrive all! With cordial regards, David Brin http://www.davidbrin.com = Yes, I got a LOT of mail about the Salon article. and that doesnt count the letters to both my blog and Salon itself! What shocked me was the degree of passion... no, bilious RAGE that my effrontery provoked. In comparison, mere politics and religion seem to have mild effects! Only a small minority seemed at all interested in even looking at my core idea, which was how to create a nice, comfortable starting point for millions of kids, so they could use their computers to do a little COMPUTING for mild classroom assignments, and so get a taste of this way of looking at the world. Indeed, the tiniest fraction seemed to grasp how valuable it once was (but no longer) for ALL kids to be able to easily type in little illustrative examples at the end of each math or physics chapters. Everyone seemed to think it could still be done. But it cannot. I repeat that. It cannot AND it simply, simply cannot be done. It does no good to preach what languages kids SHOULD have. Most dont. Period. Three solutions were offered that might plausibly address the problem in a practical way. 1) Somehow persuade Microsoft to care. In which case, with a fingernails effort, they could offer micro-implementations of Basic, python, scratch, etc in versions tuned precisely to be usable as classroom and homework demos, with launchpads to download expanded versions if the kids interest is sparked. 2) Some place with an historical interest in Basic (like Dartmouth) could create a slimmed version, along with maybe a hundred little 12-line programs that illustrate everything from statistics to galilean laws of motion to PONG, and offer this perfect turnkey download for text publishers to link to. (BTW, did you know that TrueBasic http://www.truebasic.com/ is still being offered? I didn't know myself until 30 seconds ago. 40 bucks for the dumbed down version. Includes some demo programs, apparently. Sounds like no solution, alas.) 3) Many readers are so enthusiastic for PYTHON... and I admit it seems to be the logical successor to BASIC. It allows simple syntax and direct expression of the algorith in sequential lines of code -- which would be highly compatible with the notion of collaborating with schools and textbook publishers. Indeed, an effort along these lines can be seen at: http://www.python.org/doc/essays/cp4e/ Indeed, Python is so widely available, that the goal might be achieved simply via some kind of DECLARATION... say by a prominent education association... declaring support for a Python-based universal entry-level environment. If well-publicized, that may be all thats needed for everyone from Microsoft and Apple to textbook publishers to lift their pinkies (a minimal twitch) and make this happen. 4) In order to keep using those textbooks (like my sons) that still have TRY IT IN BASIC exercises, one reader had a fantastically simple suggestion. A turn-key web site! For easy to use BASIC, it occurred to me that someone could set up a web site consisting of a single big BASIC window. Use Ajax to connect it to a server running one of the free BASICs to do the computation. Retain the BASIC session between visits using cookies. This isn't too hard, it could be whipped up in a week or two. Some of the letters Ive received pointed out that JAVA is the one language so ubiquitous that maybe it might do. Only, alas, the syntax is so difficult and unfriendly to beginners that its just not help, after all. Unless... a coterie of Java guys created some plug-ins and maybe a few dozen sample programs that would accomplish dual goals (1) illustrate something cool from math/physics curricula or a classic game or moving pixels with math and (2) enticed with software elegance. Such a set of small programs might entice textbook publishers and teachers, in turn, to go along. And Javas universal distribution could then do the trick. (And yes, I admit TOTAL ignorance about both Java and Javascript... which are apparently VERY different... which shows how long this road may be.) Alas, from the majority of the responses I received, it seems that most of those who already know software see absolutely no problem arising from the fact that nearly all computers today lack a universally accessible beginners; language. Nearly all of them have
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
Although number one, M$oft, could be done with some public pressure - or Apple doing it first - my vote is Four: 4) In order to keep using those textbooks (like my son’s) that still have TRY IT IN BASIC exercises, one reader had a fantastically simple suggestion. A turn-key web site! “For easy to use BASIC, it occurred to me that someone could set up a web site consisting of a single big BASIC window. Use Ajax to connect it to a server running one of the free BASICs to do the computation. Retain the BASIC session between visits using cookies. This isn't too hard, it could be whipped up in a week or two.” My first experience was editing a lunar lander game running in BASIC on a Commodore PET w/cassette tapes for off-line storage. This small beginning lead me to ever greater systems and although I rarely code much beyond CSS anymore it has been an invaluable stepping stone and gave me early insight into this industry. As an under-employed designer I'd be more than happy to begin developing this with a small team. Any takers or interested parties please GOTO [EMAIL PROTECTED] and I can at least coordinate. END - Jonathan Gibson - On Sep 22, 2006, at 8:22 AM, David Brin wrote: Hi brinellers! Glad to see you still in business! I am very sorry to have neglected you in favor of that darned, time-consuming blog. http://www.davidbrin.blogspot.com/ In part because the political issues are so important/urgent right now that I'll grab any influence where I can get it. Of course see news at http://www.davidbrin.com and watch out for my new History Channel show in November. As for the article that just appeared in Salon, whew! Let me append below my canned response after receiving HUNDREDS of emails (not including more hundreds that came into Salon Slashdot!) Thrive all! With cordial regards, David Brin http://www.davidbrin.com = Yes, I got a LOT of mail about the Salon article. and that doesn’t count the letters to both my blog and Salon itself! What shocked me was the degree of passion... no, bilious RAGE that my effrontery provoked. In comparison, mere politics and religion seem to have mild effects! Only a small minority seemed at all interested in even looking at my core idea, which was how to create a nice, comfortable starting point for millions of kids, so they could use their computers to do a little COMPUTING for mild classroom assignments, and so get a taste of this way of looking at the world. Indeed, the tiniest fraction seemed to grasp how valuable it once was (but no longer) for ALL kids to be able to easily type in little illustrative examples at the end of each math or physics chapters. Everyone seemed to think it could still be done. But it cannot. I repeat that. It cannot AND it simply, simply cannot be done. It does no good to preach what languages kids SHOULD have. Most don’t. Period. Three solutions were offered that might plausibly address the problem in a practical way. 1) Somehow persuade Microsoft to care. In which case, with a fingernail’s effort, they could offer micro-implementations of Basic, python, scratch, etc in versions tuned precisely to be usable as classroom and homework demos, with “launchpads” to download expanded versions if the kids’ interest is sparked. 2) Some place with an historical interest in Basic (like Dartmouth) could create a slimmed version, along with maybe a hundred little 12-line programs that illustrate everything from statistics to galilean laws of motion to PONG, and offer this “perfect turnkey download” for text publishers to link to. (BTW, did you know that TrueBasic http://www.truebasic.com/ is still being offered? I didn't know myself until 30 seconds ago. 40 bucks for the dumbed down version. Includes some demo programs, apparently. Sounds like no solution, alas.) 3) Many readers are so enthusiastic for PYTHON... and I admit it seems to be the logical successor to BASIC. It allows simple syntax and direct expression of the algorith in sequential lines of code -- which would be highly compatible with the notion of collaborating with schools and textbook publishers. Indeed, an effort along these lines can be seen at: http://www.python.org/doc/essays/cp4e/ Indeed, Python is so widely available, that the goal might be achieved simply via some kind of DECLARATION... say by a prominent education association... declaring support for a Python-based universal entry-level environment. If well-publicized, that may be all that’s needed for everyone from Microsoft and Apple to textbook publishers to lift their pinkies (a minimal twitch) and make this happen. 4) In order to keep using those textbooks (like my son’s) that still have TRY IT IN BASIC exercises, one reader had a fantastically simple suggestion. A turn-key web site! “For easy to use BASIC, it occurred to me that someone could set up a web site consisting of a single big BASIC window. Use Ajax to connect it to a server running one of
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
Hi, WHILE we're on the subject of ancient programming languages AND their relative merits, we might as well dip into that deep well of wisdom regarding programming that poured forth from the nimble fingers of Edsger Dijkstra: How do we tell truths that might hurt? (http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans/cs655/readings/ewd498.html) In which a number of ancient programming languages are given the acerbic treatment FOR which he was known. For those of you who are thinking about implementing an online BASIC interpreter, here's one that's already running: http://www.pachesoft.com/rockerferbasic/ Dave PS: The Good Doctor's eulogy for BASIC is mentioned in the Maturity section of the Wikipedia entry for BASIC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BASIC ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
For those of you who are thinking about implementing an online BASIC interpreter, here's one that's already running: http://www.pachesoft.com/rockerferbasic/ This is a great idea. But need to make a list of attributes that such an implementation would need. 1. A good welcome page that gave extremely simple instructions for use, just clicking a button and beginning to type in the code from, say a textbook. But with links that can lead to tutorials and other info, if students want. 2. tested with some of the more common textbook examples, to be sure they work, with a minimum of steps. 3. link to a LIBRARY of cool games and short demo programs... with a method for people to inload their own contributions. 4. A very easy to use graphics pop-up screen, that shows pixels moving in response to the program. 5. Something I think would be great. a button that lets you iterate the value of n each time you press it, instead of just letting the program zoom ahead. Great for students who want to watch the algorithm gradually change in time. 6. A list of cooperating institutions and text publishers. Obviously if you add my laundry list. This starts to look like a substantial project. The good news is that a version that works basically could then lead to a grant to finish it... ...But I am more an instigator than finisher. Alas, now I must go on to hurl OTHER grenades! PS: The Good Doctor's eulogy for BASIC is mentioned in the Maturity section of the Wikipedia entry for BASIC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BASIC Kewl! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
Dave Land wrote: PS: The Good Doctor's eulogy for BASIC is mentioned in the Maturity section of the Wikipedia entry for BASIC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BASIC Hmmm... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BASICaction=history ... who is Dland? :-) Now do the proper homework and increase the list of planets in the Uplift Universe :-P Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
On 22 Sep 2006 at 8:22, David Brin wrote: Only a small minority seemed at all interested in even looking at my core idea, which was how to create a nice, comfortable starting point for millions of kids, so they could use their computers to do a little COMPUTING for mild classroom assignments, and so get a taste of this way of looking at the world. If the examples are writtern in modern BASIC, then why not? That'll with with a range of modern BASICs up to and including FreeBASIC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeBASIC If it's not writtern in modern BASIC, then I have no sympathy. People don't number lines anymore. People don't use goto's. Teaching a chuld the wrong fundermental basics of coding is not a good idea. Actually, personally I'd recommend Pascal, especially for dyslexic children - the syntax is considered far more natural by many. http://www.freepascal.org/ 3) Many readers are so enthusiastic for PYTHON... and Personally I detest it. I'm a scriptor, not a coder. I have some Pascal skills, but i've mostly worked with Lua and varients, as well as visual scripting languages (partial and full), the powerful and propriatory SRealmsScript and so on. I don't like the useage of indenting it uses, it misses a lot of libraries I've used with php and it doesn't do automatic garbage collection (I admit that one usually bites me, Lua and SRealmsScript spoilt me in that regard). Indeed, Python is so widely available, that the goal might be achieved simply via some kind of DECLARATION... say by a prominent education association... declaring support for a Python-based universal entry-level environment. If Can't be just python. It doesn't compile natively, and has no native GUI. Something to keep in mind, anyway. If Lua ever gives up on being a scripting language and becomes a fully fledged programing language, then frankly it has just the potential you want to see. It's very powerful, free-as-in-free (it's used in a number of high profile commercial games for scripting) and the syntax is easy to learn for coders and non-coders alike print Hello, world http://www.lua.org http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lua_programming_language AndrewC Dawn Falcon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
At 10:11 AM Friday 9/22/2006, Klaus Stock wrote: OTOH, consider the following Smalltalk code: x := 1 / 3. x := 3 * x. x inspect. Common sense tells us that the result is 0.999 - but Smalltalk insists on 1. Funny, that's exactly the example many books used 30-odd years ago to illustrate why round-off error is a problem programmers have to keep in mind, as mathematically division by three and multiplication by three should be inverse operations, so X = 1 Y= X/3 Z = 3*Y IF (Z=X) THEN GOTO 10 PRINT (Z IS NOT EQUAL TO X) GOTO 20 10 PRINT (Z IS EQUAL TO X) 20 END would always return something like 0.99 IS NOT EQUAL TO 1 so if you expected X and Z to be equal (as it would be in mathematics or infinite-precision arithmetic) and were testing for that, it would never be equal. (In FORTRAN¹, it would be even worse if you forgot the difference between integer arithmetic and real arithmetic, as I = 1/3 would set I = 0 and then J = 3*I would make J = 0.) _ ¹Yes, this dates me to the same era as Himself. (Even though I recently re-installed the Fortran 90 package on this machine.) I probably still have some boxes of cards from those days somewhere in the storage shed . . . another benefit (?) of inheriting the house you lived in back then from your parents . . . ) -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
On 23/09/2006, at 1:11 AM, Klaus Stock wrote: OTOH, consider the following Smalltalk code: x := 1 / 3. x := 3 * x. x inspect. Common sense tells us that the result is 0.999 - but Smalltalk insists on 1. Um, .9* *is* 1. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
At 08:20 PM Friday 9/22/2006, Charlie Bell wrote: On 23/09/2006, at 1:11 AM, Klaus Stock wrote: OTOH, consider the following Smalltalk code: x := 1 / 3. x := 3 * x. x inspect. Common sense tells us that the result is 0.999 - but Smalltalk insists on 1. Um, .9* *is* 1. .999... is equal to 1. (infinite string of 9s) .999 is not equal to 1. (finite string of 9s) As I said earlier, computers represent numbers with a finite number of digits, which causes round-off errors, which can grow when the result of one calculation is used in another calculation. Especially when you subtract two nearly equal numbers. -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
On 23/09/2006, at 11:52 AM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: At 08:20 PM Friday 9/22/2006, Charlie Bell wrote: On 23/09/2006, at 1:11 AM, Klaus Stock wrote: OTOH, consider the following Smalltalk code: x := 1 / 3. x := 3 * x. x inspect. Common sense tells us that the result is 0.999 - but Smalltalk insists on 1. Um, .9* *is* 1. .999... is equal to 1. (infinite string of 9s) .999 is not equal to 1. (finite string of 9s) As I said earlier, computers represent numbers with a finite number of digits, which causes round-off errors, which can grow when the result of one calculation is used in another calculation. Especially when you subtract two nearly equal numbers. Computers do, but do no programming environments take account of this, by marking recurring numbers as such? Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
At 09:02 PM Friday 9/22/2006, Charlie Bell wrote: On 23/09/2006, at 11:52 AM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: At 08:20 PM Friday 9/22/2006, Charlie Bell wrote: On 23/09/2006, at 1:11 AM, Klaus Stock wrote: OTOH, consider the following Smalltalk code: x := 1 / 3. x := 3 * x. x inspect. Common sense tells us that the result is 0.999 - but Smalltalk insists on 1. Um, .9* *is* 1. .999... is equal to 1. (infinite string of 9s) .999 is not equal to 1. (finite string of 9s) As I said earlier, computers represent numbers with a finite number of digits, which causes round-off errors, which can grow when the result of one calculation is used in another calculation. Especially when you subtract two nearly equal numbers. Computers do, but do no programming environments take account of this, by marking recurring numbers as such? Anyone know how Mathematica works? -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
On 9/22/06, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . The Wikipedia entry for R is under GNU-S :-) Alberto Monteiro I hate to play the pedantic resident Wikipedia expert here, but it's actually at [[R (programming language)]] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_%28programming_language%29), like it should (since programming languages' whose name are ambiguous are supposed to be disambiguated rather than be at [[R programming language]], which could be misleading). Now, [[GNU S]] and [[GNU-S]] do indeed redirect to the actual article, but that's not the same thing as the article being at those names... ~maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
... Especially when you subtract two nearly equal numbers. Computers do, but do no programming environments take account of this, by marking recurring numbers as such? Anyone know how Mathematica works? -- Ronn! :) Ronn-- I believe it avoids decimal approximations unless they are specifically asked for. Rational numbers would always be represented internally as pairs of integers. And this continues; almost everything is represented symbolically. So (1 + sqrt(2))^2 is exactly 3 + 2*sqrt(2), etc. ---David As one would expect from the name, Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: basic is evil, why it must be eradicated
At 10:14 PM Friday 9/22/2006, David Hobby wrote: ... Especially when you subtract two nearly equal numbers. Computers do, but do no programming environments take account of this, by marking recurring numbers as such? Anyone know how Mathematica works? -- Ronn! :) Ronn-- I believe it avoids decimal approximations unless they are specifically asked for. Rational numbers would always be represented internally as pairs of integers. And this continues; almost everything is represented symbolically. So (1 + sqrt(2))^2 is exactly 3 + 2*sqrt(2), etc. ---David As one would expect from the name, Maru I thought it was something of the sort, but I figured someone else here might know better than I do. (I've been a good little boy and not attempted to reverse engineer the copy I have here. :P As to finding the book in all this stuff, I'm not sure I'd have an idea where to start more exact than the room it's most likely in . . . :( ) -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
On 08/05/2006, at 3:01 AM, The Fool wrote: http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2006/05/age-of-miracles-wonder.html Only now it's insufficient. We'd like to make pixels move around on a simulated CRT screen. And we DON'T want to do it using high-level complex stuff like VISUAL BASIC. Old fashioned line coding, iterating to move pixels according to simple algorithms. Is that too much to ask? (Apparently so. In fact, the number of peopls who (last time) simply could not even grasp what I was looking for, and kept recommending complex, high-level stuff, shows what a mental block this is.) Logo. http://el.media.mit.edu/Logo-foundation/ Simple instructions for making a turtle (remember those???) wander about a screen. And draw pretty patterns with a bit of maths. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
On May 7, 2006, at 11:02 PM, Charlie Bell wrote: On 08/05/2006, at 3:01 AM, The Fool wrote: http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2006/05/age-of-miracles-wonder.html Only now it's insufficient. We'd like to make pixels move around on a simulated CRT screen. And we DON'T want to do it using high-level complex stuff like VISUAL BASIC. Old fashioned line coding, iterating to move pixels according to simple algorithms. Is that too much to ask? (Apparently so. In fact, the number of peopls who (last time) simply could not even grasp what I was looking for, and kept recommending complex, high-level stuff, shows what a mental block this is.) Logo. http://el.media.mit.edu/Logo-foundation/ Simple instructions for making a turtle (remember those???) wander about a screen. And draw pretty patterns with a bit of maths. Mongoloids love it. How how about some real code hacking? -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress The Seven-Year Mirror http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Storms_on_a_Flat_Placid_Sea.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
On 08/05/2006, at 9:26 AM, Warren Ockrassa wrote: On May 7, 2006, at 11:02 PM, Charlie Bell wrote: On 08/05/2006, at 3:01 AM, The Fool wrote: http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2006/05/age-of-miracles- wonder.html Only now it's insufficient. We'd like to make pixels move around on a simulated CRT screen. And we DON'T want to do it using high-level complex stuff like VISUAL BASIC. Old fashioned line coding, iterating to move pixels according to simple algorithms. Is that too much to ask? (Apparently so. In fact, the number of peopls who (last time) simply could not even grasp what I was looking for, and kept recommending complex, high-level stuff, shows what a mental block this is.) Logo. http://el.media.mit.edu/Logo-foundation/ Simple instructions for making a turtle (remember those???) wander about a screen. And draw pretty patterns with a bit of maths. Mongoloids love it. How how about some real code hacking? Real code hacking wasn't what was being asked for, iterating to move pixels according to simple algorithms was. Logo does exactly that. As a simple tool for teaching program flow and algorithms to young kids, it's perfect. A bit later you can move on to BASIC then onto PASCAL and real code hacking in C++ or whatever. And mongoloids is considered pretty offensive in some parts. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
The Fool wrote: I don't get it. QBasic came standard with MS-DOS 5-7. But not with Mac... BTW, I can find Linux compilers/interpreters for all languages [C/C++, Fortran, Pascal, Perl, Python, Haskell, Prolog, etc], but not BASIC. Maybe Mac lacks BASIC too. Can this be an anti-M$ Conpiracy? :-) Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
On 8 May 2006, at 12:28PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote: The Fool wrote: I don't get it. QBasic came standard with MS-DOS 5-7. But not with Mac... BTW, I can find Linux compilers/interpreters for all languages [C/C++, Fortran, Pascal, Perl, Python, Haskell, Prolog, etc], but not BASIC. Maybe Mac lacks BASIC too. Can this be an anti-M$ Conpiracy? :-) http://www.realbasic.com/products/screenshots/linux/ http://www.realbasic.com/products/screenshots/mac/ -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ Every Sunday Christians congregate to drink blood in honour of their zombie master. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
On 08/05/2006, at 2:28 PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote: The Fool wrote: I don't get it. QBasic came standard with MS-DOS 5-7. But not with Mac... BTW, I can find Linux compilers/interpreters for all languages [C/C++, Fortran, Pascal, Perl, Python, Haskell, Prolog, etc], but not BASIC. http://www.freebasic.net/ has linux support. There are a few others. Maybe Mac lacks BASIC too. Can this be an anti-M$ Conpiracy? :-) http://www.nicholson.com/rhn/basic/ I doubt the conspiracy theory. I think it's that there are so many dialects of BASIC that it's not the useful beginner's language that it used to be. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
As for fibbonacci sequences a more correct function would be along these lines: (c) 2006 The Fool ' where fib(0) = 0 Function FibNum(Fib As Long) As Long If (Fib 0) Then FibNum = FibPos((Fib - 1)) Else ' FibNum = FibNeg(Fib + 1) End If End Function Function FibPos(Fib As Long) As Long If (Fib 2) Then FibPos = 1 Else ' FibPos = (FibPos(Fib - 2) + FibPos(Fib - 1)) End If End Function Function FibNeg(Fib As Long) As Long If (Fib 1) Then FibNeg = 1 Else ' FibNeg = (FibNeg(Fib + 2) - FibNeg(Fib + 1)) End If End Function A poster at your weblog got it wrong: -- ...34/-21/13/-8/5/-3/2/-1/1/0/1/1/2/3/5/8/13/21/34... ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
Warren. Thanks. One guy at Apple has helped me with a few of my problems. A few others linger on. I will append a list of those, below. As for BASIC, it's really simple. I want to show Ben the line-by-line coding that started it all, and that still lies deep in the heart of higher level languages. He WILL learn C++ and other tools to do sophisticated things. But this is not about what can be done. It is about doing some very simple things that are... BASIC. Apple stuff: Questions about OS 10.4: 1. I have always wondered why - in list view - you can see the KB size of files but not the KB size of folders. SUpposedly there is calculate folder sizes under View Options but I do not see this option for some reason. 2. Windowshade_X allows me to resore the minimizing features I find much more useful than the into-the-dock silliness, that duplicates Windows. Seriously, this one is a marvel. Now I have SEVERAL methods, each appropos under different circumstances. 3. Irritating in OSX! I pull a folder out of another folder and put it on my desktop. IT DOESNT SIT WHERE I PUT IT! Instead, it heads out to appear somewhere ELSE on the desktop. Nor even in the same place every time, but in random places, even BEHIND active windows, so I have to minimize all the windows looking for it. Why? 4. I do not have Speech turned on, yet the round microphone doohicky-jobby ALWAYS appears on my desktop and there is no way to get rid of it! The best I can do is minimize it. 5. Spotlight wont index my old OS9 Word perfect files by content, only their titles. Someone just suggested:To Spotlight WP files: http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/spotlight/ wordperfectspotlightplugin.html I plan to try it tonight. 6. The garish colors for colored files... Must the file NAMES be so loudly colored? I miss when it was just the icon that was colored. someone suggested: To mute OS10 colors http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/19585vid=142775 db --- Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Easy stuff first. I'm an OSX wonk and have been a while -- I participated in the public beta, back before the century turned, when my PowerBook, on its first load of the nascent OS, ran through a series of UNIX (actually Darwin, which is Apple's version of FreeBSD, which is technically not UNIX) style command-line load instructions before presenting me with a UI I'd seen in sccreenshots, but never actually hacked before. It was definitely not pre-X Mac, and it definitely needed work. If you think X.4 is quirky, you should have seen the first version. Oy. So if you need help there, let me know what with. As to the BASIC question: I'll shoot you a counter-question: Why? Assembly is the ultimate line-by-line language, but it's not necessarily the best instruction base for showing a kid how to do things onscreen. If you want to explore that direction, using line code without the benefit of an IDE, consider exploring JavaScript. It gives you the OOP the modern era expects along with options for linear execution, and best of all it runs in a browser layer. (That's best, because it means you can't accidentally include instructions that will, say, format the drive.) It's also eminently portable. The syntax is funky but it follows the C model, which is used by Java, Perl (somewhat) and of course C++. Also, JS is the script engine of choice for Flash, which is (sigh) considered the pre-eminent core to use for multimedia online games, apps and so on. Wanting to work in BASIC to show a kid how to hack code seems a little like trying to introduce a twelve-year-old to the wonders of having a ham radio license by insisting he learn Morse code. Start with world radio, then get him hooked on speaking by voice to human beings on the other side of the planet (unless he has an Xbox), then work *backward* to the understructure. It makes more sense pedagogically to begin with the fun light stuff and work into details as the student requests them. Put another way, if an eight-year-old came to you with a story he'd just written, would you lecture him on syntax and spelling errors, or would you rather praise his imagination and willingness to try at all? BASIC is not necessarily the best beginning for a computer engineering career. The fact is that code is written on a much more abstract level now, one which blurs the line between (for instance) graphics and interpreter commands. In your novel _Earth_ you don't make the ludicrous suggestion that sophisticated avatars are running commands such as 10 seek news; 20 goto 10. They will exist, but they won't be made on the linear programming level; they will be aggregates of pre-assembled, generic objects. -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress The Seven-Year Mirror
Re: Brin: BASIC
On May 8, 2006, at 1:09 PM, David Brin wrote: Warren. Thanks. One guy at Apple has helped me with a few of my problems. A few others linger on. I will append a list of those, below. Okay. As for BASIC, it's really simple. I want to show Ben the line-by-line coding that started it all, and that still lies deep in the heart of higher level languages. He WILL learn C++ and other tools to do sophisticated things. But this is not about what can be done. It is about doing some very simple things that are... BASIC. Ah, that makes a lot of sense. VersionTracker shows quite a few returns for basic but most aren't the language. Here are some URLs that might be worth a look. http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/7381 http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/22597 http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/13017 http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/3237 http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/3773 http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/27096 [n.b., I don't have X.4 on this machine, but X.3 should do most of the same stuff.] 1. I have always wondered why - in list view - you can see the KB size of files but not the KB size of folders. You can, but it slows the system down since the size appears to be dynamically calculated. When you're in list view in any given Finder window, select View options from the View menu and check the Calculate all sizes box. SUpposedly there is calculate folder sizes under View Options but I do not see this option for some reason. Heh. You do have to actually have a window open in list view in order for that option to be available, oddly enough. (Kind of a quirk in the UI, in my opinion.) 3. Irritating in OSX! I pull a folder out of another folder and put it on my desktop. IT DOESN’T SIT WHERE I PUT IT! Instead, it heads out to appear somewhere ELSE on the desktop. Nor even in the same place every time, but in random places, even BEHIND active windows, so I have to minimize all the windows looking for it. Why? The grid view on the Desktop behaves that way. This is something that annoys me as well. With the Desktop active, go back to the trusty View options menu from View, and uncheck snap to grid. Alternately consider changing the icon sizes or spacing; that might reduce the flying-icons problem. 4. I do not have Speech turned on, yet the round microphone doohicky-jobby ALWAYS appears on my desktop and there is no way to get rid of it! The best I can do is minimize it. It might be on by default. Under X.3, if you get into the Speech control panel and look under the On/Off section, there's a checkbox that reads Turn on Speakable Items at login. Make sure that's not checked. Also, X.3 has command-/ set up as being the toggle to activate the speakable items. If you're pressing that combination inadvertently, it could be activating speech. Can't address the WP question either; as for labels, they *went away entirely* until X.3! :( Maybe you could edit the label color to keep it more mellow. -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress The Seven-Year Mirror http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Storms_on_a_Flat_Placid_Sea.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
BTW, I feel I need to apologize for my unnecessary and rather stupid comment yesterday. I'm not usually that thoughtless. Sorry, all. -- Warren ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
--- Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Heh. You do have to actually have a window open in list view in order for that option to be available, oddly enough. Gotcha thanks. 3. Irritating in OSX! I pull a folder out of another folder and put it on my desktop. IT DOESNT SIT WHERE I PUT IT! Instead, it heads out to appear somewhere ELSE on the desktop. Nor even in the same place every time, but in random places, even BEHIND active windows, so I have to minimize all the windows looking for it. Why? The grid view on the Desktop behaves that way. This is something that annoys me as well. With the Desktop active, go back to the trusty View options menu from View, and uncheck snap to grid. Alternately consider changing the icon sizes or spacing; that might reduce the flying-icons problem. I long ago tried all of that. Never was snap to grid ever activated, 4. I do not have Speech turned on, yet the round microphone doohicky-jobby ALWAYS appears on my desktop and there is no way to get rid of it! The best I can do is minimize it. It might be on by default. Under X.3, if you get into the Speech control panel and look under the On/Off section, there's a checkbox that reads Turn on Speakable Items at login. Make sure that's not checked. Did that long ago. Also, X.3 has command-/ set up as being the toggle to activate the speakable items. If you're pressing that combination inadvertently, it could be activating speech. A danger for a guy like me who uses lots of reconfigured Quickeys... but no. It is off, off, off! And the goodgie-McFlopper disk won't go away. Thanks. db ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
On 5/8/06, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Fool wrote: I don't get it. QBasic came standard with MS-DOS 5-7. But not with Mac... BTW, I can find Linux compilers/interpreters for all languages [C/C++, Fortran, Pascal, Perl, Python, Haskell, Prolog, etc], but not BASIC. Maybe Mac lacks BASIC too. Can this be an anti-M$ Conpiracy? :-) Alberto Monteiro Then you're not really trying. I found an article with overviews of Purebasic, Realbasic, HBasic, Gambas, XBasic, KBasic, and Phoenix Object Basic. (all for linux, apparently) in 10 or so seconds of Googling. ~maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
On May 8, 2006, at 2:04 PM, David Brin wrote: The grid view on the Desktop behaves that way. This is something that annoys me as well. With the Desktop active, go back to the trusty View options menu from View, and uncheck snap to grid. Alternately consider changing the icon sizes or spacing; that might reduce the flying-icons problem. I long ago tried all of that. Never was snap to grid ever activated, OK, that's gotta be an X.4 specific quirk then. Drat. Also, X.3 has command-/ set up as being the toggle to activate the speakable items. If you're pressing that combination inadvertently, it could be activating speech. A danger for a guy like me who uses lots of reconfigured Quickeys... but no. It is off, off, off! And the goodgie-McFlopper disk won't go away. That's just plain irritating. Does it pop up from the moment of login, or later? -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress The Seven-Year Mirror http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Storms_on_a_Flat_Placid_Sea.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
On 09/05/2006, at 1:14 AM, Warren Ockrassa wrote: On May 8, 2006, at 2:04 PM, David Brin wrote: The grid view on the Desktop behaves that way. This is something that annoys me as well. With the Desktop active, go back to the trusty View options menu from View, and uncheck snap to grid. Alternately consider changing the icon sizes or spacing; that might reduce the flying-icons problem. I long ago tried all of that. Never was snap to grid ever activated, OK, that's gotta be an X.4 specific quirk then. Drat. Never seen it. But then, I did a clean install of Tiger, I've heard upgrading from Panther can be... odd. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
On May 8, 2006, at 3:18 PM, Charlie Bell wrote: Never seen it. But then, I did a clean install of Tiger, I've heard upgrading from Panther can be... odd. I think that's the case for *all* of them. You need to fix permissions first, and even then some things are apparently overlooked. IIRC the upgrade from X.1 to X.2 was particularly difficult, but it wasn't something I contended with. -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress The Seven-Year Mirror http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Storms_on_a_Flat_Placid_Sea.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
I use a brand new Mc G5 Big Iron machine, Tiger, three weeks old. (Had to buy the last Power PC chip machine!) The speech dooodgie button pops up on startup and won't go away. The weird way icons shift on the desktop started right out of the box. --- Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 09/05/2006, at 1:14 AM, Warren Ockrassa wrote: On May 8, 2006, at 2:04 PM, David Brin wrote: The grid view on the Desktop behaves that way. This is something that annoys me as well. With the Desktop active, go back to the trusty View options menu from View, and uncheck snap to grid. Alternately consider changing the icon sizes or spacing; that might reduce the flying-icons problem. I long ago tried all of that. Never was snap to grid ever activated, OK, that's gotta be an X.4 specific quirk then. Drat. Never seen it. But then, I did a clean install of Tiger, I've heard upgrading from Panther can be... odd. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Brin: BASIC
From: Warren Ockrassa BTW, I feel I need to apologize for my unnecessary and rather stupid comment yesterday. I'm not usually that thoughtless. Sorry, all. I, for one, Welcome the return of your stupid and unnecessary comments. Which one was it anyway Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
Easy stuff first. I'm an OSX wonk and have been a while -- I participated in the public beta, back before the century turned, when my PowerBook, on its first load of the nascent OS, ran through a series of UNIX (actually Darwin, which is Apple's version of FreeBSD, which is technically not UNIX) style command-line load instructions before presenting me with a UI I'd seen in sccreenshots, but never actually hacked before. It was definitely not pre-X Mac, and it definitely needed work. If you think X.4 is quirky, you should have seen the first version. Oy. So if you need help there, let me know what with. As to the BASIC question: I'll shoot you a counter-question: Why? Assembly is the ultimate line-by-line language, but it's not necessarily the best instruction base for showing a kid how to do things onscreen. If you want to explore that direction, using line code without the benefit of an IDE, consider exploring JavaScript. It gives you the OOP the modern era expects along with options for linear execution, and best of all it runs in a browser layer. (That's best, because it means you can't accidentally include instructions that will, say, format the drive.) It's also eminently portable. The syntax is funky but it follows the C model, which is used by Java, Perl (somewhat) and of course C++. Also, JS is the script engine of choice for Flash, which is (sigh) considered the pre-eminent core to use for multimedia online games, apps and so on. Wanting to work in BASIC to show a kid how to hack code seems a little like trying to introduce a twelve-year-old to the wonders of having a ham radio license by insisting he learn Morse code. Start with world radio, then get him hooked on speaking by voice to human beings on the other side of the planet (unless he has an Xbox), then work *backward* to the understructure. It makes more sense pedagogically to begin with the fun light stuff and work into details as the student requests them. Put another way, if an eight-year-old came to you with a story he'd just written, would you lecture him on syntax and spelling errors, or would you rather praise his imagination and willingness to try at all? BASIC is not necessarily the best beginning for a computer engineering career. The fact is that code is written on a much more abstract level now, one which blurs the line between (for instance) graphics and interpreter commands. In your novel _Earth_ you don't make the ludicrous suggestion that sophisticated avatars are running commands such as 10 seek news; 20 goto 10. They will exist, but they won't be made on the linear programming level; they will be aggregates of pre-assembled, generic objects. -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress The Seven-Year Mirror http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Storms_on_a_Flat_Placid_Sea.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
From: Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] As to the BASIC question: I'll shoot you a counter-question: Why? snip JavaSh!t and high level programming Dr. Brin isn't interested in that high level stuff. Too complicated. Not simple enough. Don't bring it up again or he'll start getting, really, really, really whiny (again). ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
I'll ignore the ad hominem, but point out that OOP frameworks rock tha' hizzouse. That's why I wrote a 500+ page book on the topic for Osborne/McGraw-Hill, after all. On May 7, 2006, at 5:54 PM, The Fool wrote: From: Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] As to the BASIC question: I'll shoot you a counter-question: Why? snip JavaSh!t and high level programming -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress The Seven-Year Mirror http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Storms_on_a_Flat_Placid_Sea.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC
Also, in re Paul Simon. I think _Graceland_ is probably his best work ever. Lasers in the jungle, yes … but his human touch was and is astonishing. The Mississippi Delta was shining like a National guitar … I am following the highway to the cradle of the Civil War is a fantastic entrant verse to a profoundly sweet and intense ballad of self-discovery, combined with a terse mix of language, poetry and lyric that is, in this world of niggas with AKs, sorely hard to find. I can't say for sure, but I bet Huey Freeman would agree. -- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress The Seven-Year Mirror http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf http://books.nightwares.com/ockrassa/Storms_on_a_Flat_Placid_Sea.pdf ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC implementation
--- Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure if you're still interested in finding a BASIC interpreter, Dave helped me solve the immediate problem with the delightful Chipmunk Basic which, on a Mac, simply and charmingly works. It clearly will fall down when I later get to more sophisticated graphical stuff, but my kids may move on to C++ by then anyway. What I needed was a way to show simple cause and effect and use great old demo problems from books. WHich is not to say that I would turn down something like that to run on a PC! If there's a free CD rom (or semi-free) that has a solid, easy to use basic on it for PC, I'd be delighted to get a copy of that too. If you have checked it out? even better. Thanks ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: BASIC, Java Etc.
On Aug 11, 2004, at 6:55 PM, Davd Brin wrote: I shall try ybasic, thanks. But after the horror of trying xbasic and qbasic and all the others, I do not expect much success. All were created by techies who suffer from techie-disease... an absolute assumption that everyboddy who downloads their compiler will instantly and miraculously know how to use it. The manuals are gibberish. There is nothing at all resembling a simple place to write line by line code and simply typr run. Hmm, if you use a modern BASIC be prepared for more frustration. There are many, many different flavors of BASIC and there's no guarantee they'll be compatible with your books. On the other hand, there's only one flavor of Python and one flavor of Java... Jim ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
