[Info-vax] BASIC (was Re: 64-bit)

[Dan Cross]

In article <unuajj$3vt4f$1 at dont-email.me>,
Arne Vajhøj  <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>On 1/13/2024 9:54 AM, Dan Cross wrote:
>> In article <unsbik$3jsdv$1 at dont-email.me>,
>> Arne Vajhøj  <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>> The business application just builds on general purpose libraries.
>>>
>>> If the platform comes with good general purpose libraries, then
>>> everything needed is there.
>>>
>>> If not so lucky then a custom library may be needed, but that
>>> is a library not a business application thing. And that library
>>> is not necessarily written by the same developer and not necessarily
>>> in the same language as the business application. Different
>>> skill set and different requirements.
>>>
>>> Basic and some ERP system. It uses some collections framework,
>>> some XML and JSON libs, a database lib etc.. Money is made
>>> from getting the application completed and out the door, not
>>> from creating better libraries.
>>>
>>> Or Python and data analysis. The developer knows Python,
>>> the data and how to interpret results. Deep down the
>>> stack there are some matrix multiplication and inversion
>>> code written in Fortran by a developer that knows nothing
>>> about data analysis. What would happen if the Python
>>> developer wanted to implement a custom matrix inversion?
>>> Most likely not anything good!
>> 
>> This may all be true, but a) suggesting that business
>> programmers can't or shouldn't implement elementary data
>> structures seems a bit on the nose,
>
>Some business applications developers can and should. Writing
>good general purpose libraries is distinct from writing business
>application, but the abilities are not mutually exclusive. Some
>people have skills within more than one area,
>
>>                                    and b) if the language makes
>> it difficult to do so, that's a real shame.  BASIC is a general
>> purpose programming language, not a DSL.
>
>Most general purpose languages have areas where they are
>strong and areas where they are not strong. VMS Basic is good
>at reading, writing and manipulating text and amount - old style
>business programming. It is not good for writing various dynamic
>data structures, multi threaded programming or privileged code. I
>would not even consider it a good choice for scientific
>programming. Its competitor languages must be Cobol, PL/I, Dibol
>and maybe Pascal - not Fortran, C, C++, Ada, Bliss and Macro-32.

This would seem to support the thesis that newer languages have
passed VSI BASIC by.

	- Dan C.