[Info-vax] Programming languages on VMS

[Jan-Erik Soderholm]

Den 2018-01-27 kl. 04:02, skrev Bill Gunshannon:
> On 01/26/2018 06:06 PM, DaveFroble wrote:
>> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>> On 01/26/2018 03:36 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
>>>> On 2018-01-24 18:26, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>>>> Given what it was designed for BASIC was never taken seriously.  Even
>>>>> after ANSIfication it was still not overly practical as most versions
>>>>> were interpreted and not compiled. What data type of none-integer does
>>>>> BASIC support that can do calculations with decimals without the
>>>>> cumulative error common to floating point?
>>>>
>>>> Is that a trick question?
>>>> BASIC can actually do arithmetic on strings, with arbitrary precision.
>>>> And that's been in several different BASIC dialects I've played with.
>>>
>>> But the problem with BASIC is every one is different.  Not the kind
>>> of language I would be betting my business on today.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>  From the BP2 help:
>>>>
>>>>    FUNCTIONS
>>>>
>>>>      BUILT-IN
>>>>
>>>>        SUM$
>>>>
>>>>   The SUM$ function returns a string whose value is the sum of two numeric
>>>>   strings.
>>>>
>>>>   Format
>>>>
>>>>       str-vbl = SUM$(str-exp1, str-exp2)
>>>>
>>>>   Example
>>>>
>>>>   600    Sigma$ = SUM$("234.444", A$)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You also have DIF$, PROD$ and QUO$.
>>>
>>> Totally unique to DEC.  Later RSTS, RSX and then VMS.  I have
>>> worked with a number of versions of BASIC and no others did it.
>>>
>>> Considering that VMS BASIC has the DECIMAL type makes one wonder
>>> why they keep STRING Arithmetic.
>>>
>>> bill
>>>
>>>
>>> bill
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Once it's in there, it may be more trouble to rip it out, and then there 
>> are possible customers using the capability.
> 
> Guess that depends on why they added an equivalent feature.  If it
> was to become standard compliant than after a suitable time when the
> old way was marked "deprecated" it should go away.
> 
>>
>> So what if it's DEC specific.  Many DEC specific things were / are better 
>> than anything else available.  Why would anyone want to choose lowest 
>> common denominator when there is better available.  Your argument makes 
>> no sense, unless you expect the DEC stuff to go away, which, was an issue 
>> for a while.
> 
> I don;t expect the DEC stuff to go away.  I merely pointed out that
> the biggest problem with BASIC is that no two are the same.  It isn't
> least common denominator.  It's what is in the standard.  There is a
> reason people go to so  much trouble to make standards.  Too bad so
> few people end out following them.
> 
>>
>> Do you choose your cars based upon conformity to a Yugo?
> 
> Yugo was never a standard.  Well, maybe a standard for poor
> quality.
> 
>>
>> Do you do ANYTHING based upon conformity to "lowest common denominator"?
> 
> Probably not, but the standard is not "lowest common denominator".
> Or, maybe they are and we should just stop writing standards.  How
> do you think the automotive industry would be without SAE?  (Or DIN
> in Germany!) Cars was your example....
> 
> bill
> 

Yes, some/most standards are a good thing. Just think how it would
be if not everyone used a metric measuring system! What a mess...