This had the same BASIC as the BBC Microcomputer. I started back in the days with an Acorn Electron. Looked at and dabbled with many others but didn't see anything else that caught my interest enough. ZB5 (Win32 interpreter written in C++ in Australia, never finalized and never released but very stable, several programs) ZBasic (my fav DOS Basic, initially in CPM on the Amstrad 6128 then the DOS version on PC-XT's, dozens of programs) Locomotive Basic (Amstrad 6128, dozens of programs) Tandy Color Computer Basic (similar to the Basic used on the Hitachi Peach and GW Basic)Ĭommodore 64 (dozens of programs) including a Basic compilerīBC Basic (might've had a different name) Then TRS-80 Level 1 then Level 2 then the floppy disk version I originally learned Fortran (1970?) then WPL.įirsts Basic was for a HP desktop computer around 1978. These are the ones I actually wrote something with, not just had a squiz. I started with a Timex/Sinclair 1000 back in 82'. I already have a candidate project to start developing in PureBasic during Christmas vacations it remembers me the old days when I cold develop a full application in a week in VB or FoxPro. PureBasic has a huge library, creates very small executables without dependencies, it has a simple and straightforward language (no OOP, Design patterns, DI complexities). Java in the desktop is a mess, JavaFX is nice but having a 60Mb executable for a simple app is insane too, the whole process to build a Java installer is cumbersome too. These days all programs are bloated, it is insane to have 200Mb Electron apps consuming 800Mb+ of RAM. I discovered PureBasic last week while I was thinking if renewing a Xojo license I tried on Windows and Mac and felt in love with it. Then I did some professional programming with some QuickBasic and Visual Basic, and used Basic on PSION PDA's too.Īfter I worked with Clipper and FoxPro and since 2000 I work professionally with Java, C/C++ and some web technology but still have used basic (RealBasic/Xojo) for some hobby and professional utilities. My favorite feature of Pure Basic is its outstanding Help file that acts as a complete documentation set, with a user guide, full reference, and code examples.Īll in all, it is my opinion that if you want to use a BASIC language compiler in 2022, Pure Basic is definitely the way to go despite its idiosyncrasies.I started learning programming in the 80's with Commodore Vic20, then GW-Basic and TurboBasic. On the other hand, it includes a Form designer, so in this respect it reminds one of Visual Basic a little bit. you can only print strings with the Print command, so you have to convert everything (including numbers) into string before you print it on screen. In fact, it includes commands that support the OGRE 3D engine (which is built in Pure Basic). It is a little quirky (thus not very accurate historically), but very fast (slower than C though), and very complete - you can do both 2D and 3D graphics (and games) with it. it also shows that there are a lot of compilers made for that I recognize a few of them like Algol and C, never actually used any of them thoughĭo you think this is a good route to try? I mean it seems historically accurate, and the website just feels like an old guy who's made some really good software, but just threw together a website to show it off, which is a good signĪfter the de facto demise of PowerBASIC, Pure Basic is the best BASIC language compiler out there. I thought microsoft first developed basic, but Im starting to think I was wrong, I really would like to learn more computer historyīBC basic says it dosent have a compile command, which I assume means it dosent have a compiler which sounds kinda, pointless, I mean isn't what Im looking for the compiler and/or interpreter? I mean, it would be cool to also work on olde IDE's but that kind of comes secondary to the whole Id like to run the code that I writeĪlso, I found old altair software which might be cool. ![]() Im looking into that and apparently it wasn't a descendant of microsoft basic.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |