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

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 7/17/22 07:17, Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
> 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/
> 

It's YAVB....

But I think it claims to be ANSI compliant so that might
mean something.

bill