|
|
|
|
|
by laumars
4313 days ago
|
|
A Bash shell is an command line interpreter. Bash is Turing complete and even supports more advanced programming paradigms than those early BASIC machines did (eg functions, different scoping, more advanced debugging and error handling, forking, etc). This is all just built in commands - I'm not including any other POSIX user land. In the right hands, Bash is every bit as much a REPL environment as an interactive Python or LISP shell. I don't understand why you're discounting Python here though. Would you mind explaining to me why a REPL BASIC shell is different from a REPL Python shell aside the 20 years age gap between them? One last thing, as I noted in an earlier comment, most of those BASIC micro computers did also support other languages and shells. The later models of the BBC Micro came with LOGO in addition to BBC BASIC and also supported Fortran, LISP and a few other languages. My Amstrad CPC 464 runs Locomotive BASIC but I also have a CP/M disk for it. And around the same time (and a even a few years earlier) there were LISP machines and other computers which booted into other language shells. BASIC wasn't unique nor special in the regard that you're praising it for. Neither back then then nor now. What made BASIC micro computers special was how simple the language BASIC was (otherwise we'd all be looking back fondly of our Fortran or LISP machines!). And this is why I make the distinction between the shell and the language. Because there's always been and always will be a large array of similar REPL shells - the key distinction between them being the accessibility of the language. |
|
Frankly, I'm convinced javascript is the modern equivalent to BASIC. It is even complete with some horrible brain rotting syntax. But, it does provide both an easy barrier to entry (everyone has a web browser), the ability to show your results to others, and the fact that it remains in source form allows beginners to examine how something was achieved.