[Info-vax] General Availability of 9.2 for x86-64

[Jan-Erik Söderholm]

Den 2022-07-17 kl. 02:14, skrev Bill Gunshannon:
> On 7/16/22 19:37, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 7/16/2022 10:02 AM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>> On 7/16/22 09:52, Dave Froble wrote:
>>>> On 7/16/2022 8:35 AM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>>>> On 7/16/22 01:00, Dave Froble wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/15/2022 10:33 AM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>>>>>> A bigger question would be other than Dave how much of the VMS
>>>>>>> application base still uses BASIC.   :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A decent indicator of that is Clair Grant saying a while back that 
>>>>>> there would
>>>>>> always be a Basic compiler on VMS, or, something to that effect. 
>>>>>> Perhaps he
>>>>>> has a better feel for the user base?
>>>>>
>>>>> Probably true, but you have to admit that in a world where COBOL
>>>>> (the first serious business programming language) is considered
>>>>> dead and languages like Fortran, Pascal and even Ada don't even
>>>>> rate a mention in a CS degree program it is pretty funny that a
>>>>> children's programming language best known for things like the
>>>>> TRS-80 and VIC-20 is still in use.
>>>>
>>>> "children's programming language best known for things like the
>>>> TRS-80 and VIC-20"
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure that you intended that to be derogatory, or just your 
>>>> opinion, but the Basic Plus language produced by EG&H was not the same 
>>>> as some Basic languages.  It had many good features, and, was quite 
>>>> adequate for business programming, and other uses.  The name may be 
>>>> shared, but the implementations were very different.  As DEC Basic, and 
>>>> follow-ons, it has only gotten better.
>>>
>>> So did COBOL.  And what did that get it?
>>
>> Cobol has evolved original -> 74 -> 85 -> OO additions, but
>> I think it is still the same language.
> 
> Not once you start using the OO stuff.   :-)
> 
>>
>> The many flavors of Basic share the name and only a very short list
>> of common  syntactical items (*) but are otherwise very different
>> languages.
>>
>>  From the very primitive Dartmouth Basic, GW-Basic etc. to
>> pretty advanced VMS Basic, VB6, VBS etc. to full multi-paradigm
>> VB.NET.
> 
> Don't forget Basci09.  Probably one of the better dialects.
> 
>>
>> Arne
>>
>> *) What does all known Basic variants share syntax wise? Case
>>     insensitive, goto, for next loop. Anything else?
> 
> case insensitive in reserved words, but I am not sure all of
> them go beyond that.
> 
> bwBASIC: 10 ask = 10
> bwBASIC: 20 ASK = 20
> bwBASIC: 30 print ASK, ask
> bwBASIC: 99 end
> bwBASIC: run
>   20           10
> bwBASIC:
> 
> 
> I think the same applies to Basic09 but I don't have a system
> available at the moment to test it.
> 
> bill

Had to look *that* up...
https://sourceforge.net/projects/bwbasic/