Comments on: Python is the new BASIC.

By: seo

seo — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:20:18 +0000

Hi would you mind sharing which blog platform you’re using? I’m looking to start my own blog in the near future but I’m having a tough time making a decision between BlogEngine/Wordpress/B2evolution and Drupal. The reason I ask is because your design seems different then most blogs and I’m looking for something completely unique. P.S Sorry for being off-topic but I had to ask!

By: jason

jason — Tue, 27 Dec 2011 16:45:14 +0000

FreeBASIC or PureBASIC are the new BASICs. How can you say that Python is a modern version of BASIC when really its just an alternative to Ruby and not a dialect of BASIC. BASIC is BASIC, which what FreeBASIC is. And you can write any modern application in FreeBASIC (or PureBASIC). Why are programs written in psuedocode any way, its because psuedo is close to English. And which language is closest to English? why BASIC of course. So why not just program in BASIC and skip writing psuedo. Really its ridiculous why BASIC is discarded simply because of its name and the false declarations that modern BASICs are similar to early simple BASIC dialects like QBASIC , when in reality, modern BASIC languages can handle any programming tasks as equally as any other programming language. It is wrong to try and direct people away from true BASIC dialects because of legacy mentality (think BASIC — think QBASIC) and falsely claim that modern BASICs are incompetant programming environments.

By: Ben

Ben — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 18:45:39 +0000

IPython is what made learning python so much easier for me than ruby. Irb is quite nice, but it doesn’t just start flowing for me the same way that IPython did. I really would be quite happy if I could combine ruby’s syntax consistency, IPython’s capabilities and mature libraries. Wouldn’t that be wonderful for teacher and student?

By: Ronald Loui

Ronald Loui — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:44:16 +0000

Dennis Krueger #2 — I had to chime in. I had a great time programming in Pick Basic on the Pick OS (actually Microdata or some such thing). Don’t forget the Pick-English database query language.

jt #46 — this is a real issue. On the one hand, the BASIC era produced people who loved to program in great numbers. On the other hand, textbooks that return to those old days and those old ways, with modern languages, seem like anachronisms. What would John Kemeny say today? Basic was a good teaching language. It is exactly the opposite result that JAVA has had on young programmers, that makes me take such a hard line on Java.

I really think people should have a closer look at gawk as “clean perl”. You then have to learn something else — C, C++, C#, js, php, python, ruby, perl, or java — but you can keep your gawk for lots of tasks.

My opinions about languages usually come not from looking at the syntax, the libraries, nor even from doing a lot of programming in each, but from watching programmers do various tasks in them. When you see mass frustration, widespread failure, rigid designs, and projects with generous development times delivered late, you know something is wrong. When you hear people talking about how much they love their language (the Paul Graham test), it’s good to have a listen.

By: salubrium

salubrium — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 23:16:59 +0000

I am talking from someone who is learning Python and my reasons for it compared to Ruby.

1. Up until recently Ruby had little existance outside of Rails.
2. Free Books – Dive into Python, How to think like a computer scientist etc.
3. Libraries, books and information – wxpython, gtk, pyqt, pygame – there are not only these libraries but also books on how to use them
4. Python is installed by default on most *nixes
5. Want to move from interpreted to compiled languages? Boo is a .Net language inspired by Python and runs at almost C# speeds. You also have jython or ironpython for Java/.Net
6. Django, turbogears, web.py etc. give many choices over Ruby on Rails alone.

From the little I learned of Ruby, I think the difference of learning Python or Ruby is minimal but I once you move beyond the basics, Python becomes a much more relevant language.

By: Evets

Evets — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:49:08 +0000

“just as long as we keep our prejudice at bay against Smalltalk (because it really is about prejudice and lack of information).”

Baloney. Most people that investigate teaching kids programming eventually come across Squeak. Squeak as a language and idea rocks–I love it. Squeak the implementation actively turns children away from programming. Have you tried teaching Squeak to a child? Contrast this with PyGame, Pyglet or Gamemaker and it’s no wonder people eventually abandon Squeak.

By: phil

phil — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:39:48 +0000

I’ll take your challenge on testing out the book (for 9-12 year olds…) in learning Python. Will let you know how i get on… It’s been 15 years since I coded – I used Turbo C and Pascal… so let’s see if I can catch up. :)

By: Terry

Terry — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 00:58:35 +0000

Have you seen Freebasic?

http://www.freebasic.net

By: Skitsanos

Skitsanos — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 21:01:42 +0000

Quite lame post. Too many words about nothing. Taking BASIC as comparison point requires some brains and at least some experience in this area, but it seems this bit is missing here…

By: jt

jt — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 15:52:39 +0000

You know, I took a look at that game book and it struck me how so 1980s the thing was. It brought me down to memory lane.

Now, looking at the alternative (Squeak), which is fully OOP all the way down to the very menus and icons, buttons, which has a much richer environment and is totally ready for multimedia, along with the derived (written in Squeak) Scratch language, I think it’s very bad that we’re returning to Basic.

Kids deserve something better in 2008, and we can deliver it, just as long as we keep our prejudice at bay against Smalltalk (because it really is about prejudice and lack of information).