Take this survey!!!! Programmers Only!

[dosraider]

Not interesting enough?
Been done already a zillion times on other more specialised sites?
Your questions are a bit ... how to say, puberal sometimes ?
When we wanna talk/discuss programming we know our own sites.
You're what ? 11 ? I'm 52, what's new for you is old news for me and probably most of the usual members.

Something as that I presume.

And you started with a surver, then it was a snertblart..... what's next ?

[Larry Laffer]

What do you mean "Nobody votes"?

Check out the results: 7 votes! And that's well... the majority of the DGF active users

[CPT Worm]

You should try Allegro. It's really old, so you can program for DOS, as well as Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X. =O

[Gamer_V]

FINE THEN! I'll vote basic. Since it's the only one I know. (Though I should know Java according to school)

[tinman47]

...Yesssss...

[abyss]

I tried programming from flash and the best i can do is making a lousy looking character that looks like it was drawn badly in microsoft paint! I have no clue what I'm doing in flash programming so i'm sticking with gwbasic.

[tinman47]

GW Basic? Isnt that like the really ancient version of BASIC?

[dosraider]

In 1975, Microsoft launched its first product: a BASIC compiler for the MITS Altair, an early kit microcomputer.

When IBM launched its Personal Computer (PC), the software supplied included small ROM- and disk-based versions of BASIC. IBM's PC-DOS (written by Microsoft) included an expanded, disk-based version of BASIC called BASICA (advanced BASIC). Microsoft's MS-DOS for PC compatibles included a similar program called GWBASIC. The difference between BASICA and GWBASIC was that BASICA required the built-in ROM BASIC to be present.

Both BASICA and GWBASIC were interpreters that translate and execute one instruction at a time. Interpreters are easier to implement and require no memory for object code, but the code runs much slower than compiled programs.

QuickBASIC was a BASIC compiler launched around 1983 for commercial programmers who wanted to write larger programs in BASIC on PC's. Programs compiled with QuickBASIC ran four to ten times faster than under BASICA or GWBASIC. Microsoft claimed that, on an 8-MHZ IBM PC-AT, the QuickBASIC compiler could translate code at 150,000 lines per minutes (fast compared to many compilers for other languages). Furthermore, QuickBASIC was upwards compatible from the BASIC interpreters. QuickBASIC went through several upgrades, ending with version 4.5 released in 1988.

In 1987, IBM launched the PS/2 personal computers. Newer IBM and compatible PCS stopped including ROM BASIC with the hardware. Other factors, including the rapid development of applications software and increasingly sophisticated compiled languages, combined to make the original BASIC interpreters obsolete. Microsoft shipped a replacement, called QBASIC, with MS-DOS versions 5 (May 1991) and 6 (March 1993). QBASIC is a disk-based interpreter system that also shipped with Windows 95. QBASIC implements the same language as QuickBASIC, but does not include some of the advanced debugging commands. Internal memory management is also different.

A number of improvements distinguish QuickBASIC and QBASIC (together, QBs) from earlier BASIC interpreters. Source files are saved in ASCII format, whereas earlier BASIC systems stored compressed encoded source files. Both QBs include a full screen, menu-driven editor. The newer languages allow a maximum program/data space of 160K, where the previous limit was 64K. New data types were added for increased computing power.

[abyss]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_ ... nterpreter
Their is info on gwbasic amd their is a pic of gwbasic as well. Much easier coding language than qbasic.

[dosraider]

Code: Select all

01110100 01101001 01101110 01101101 01100001 01101110 00110100 00110111 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100010 01101111 01110010 01100101 

[tinman47]

Wow,thats fuckin easy.And I use Qbasic! ...