BASIC vs Python

[abisofile]

hi

I'm new to programming.I've try a little BASIC so I want ask since
Python is also interpreted lang if it's similar to BASIC.

 

[It's me]

hi

I'm new to programming.I've try a little BASIC so I want ask since
Python is also interpreted lang if it's similar to BASIC.

Is a Ferrari similar to a horse-wagon? Yes, they both have 4 wheels.

:=)

 

[Doug Holton]

hi

I'm new to programming.I've try a little BASIC so I want ask since
Python is also interpreted lang if it's similar to BASIC.

Which BASIC did you try? Realbasic? Visual Basic?

You should check out some of these beginner's python tutorials:
http://www.honors.montana.edu/~jjc/easytut/easytut.pdf
http://www.dickbaldwin.com/tocpyth.htm
http://www.freenetpages.co.uk/hp/alan.gauld/

and then if you have any questions at all about anything, people on the
python-tutor list would be glad to help:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor

If you want to make applications with a graphical user interface (GUI),
check out wxpython, although they haven't yet released a version that
works with the new python 2.4 however: http://wxpython.org/

 

[Jeff Shannon]

If you want to make applications with a graphical user interface
(GUI), check out wxpython, although they haven't yet released a
version that works with the new python 2.4 however: http://wxpython.org/

Actually, Robin *has* released 2.4 binaries, he just hasn't updated the
website yet. But Windows installers for 2.4 are available on
Sourceforge...

Jeff Shannon
Technician/Programmer
Credit International

 

[Thomas Bartkus]

The "interpreted" nature of the existing Python language has little to do
with how it compares to other languages. Most languages, including BASIC,
are available in either flavor - interpreted or compiled. And either way,
it's still the same language. That being said, one would expect an
interpreted language (like Python!) to be a bit more approachable for
beginners. The mechanics of producing a working program are just simpler
when the language is interpreted, no matter what that language might be.

It would be quite a stretch to call Python similar to any of the very many
flavors of BASIC that exist. So - the answer is no, Python is not similar
to BASIC.

Python is, however, an excellent beginners language. In fact, a serious
programmer with several languages under his belt might actually be at a
disadvantage when learning Python. At least that is my personal experience.

So

Similar to BASIC - no!
Great language for beginning programmers - yes!

Thomas Bartkus

 

[Mike Meyer]

The "interpreted" nature of the existing Python language has little to do
with how it compares to other languages. Most languages, including BASIC,
are available in either flavor - interpreted or compiled. And either way,
it's still the same language. That being said, one would expect an
interpreted language (like Python!) to be a bit more approachable for
beginners. The mechanics of producing a working program are just simpler
when the language is interpreted, no matter what that language might be.

On what basis do you think the mechanics of producing a working
language are easier because the language is interpreted? My experience
is that interpreted C (yes, I really did work with a C interpreter -
and it was the only interpreter I've ever used that had no compilation
phase whatsoever) is no easier to deal with than compiled C. Ditto for
the various flavors of LISP I've worked with.

Now, having an interactive environment with a REPL makes learning the
language and checking things a lot easier. Those tend to be rare for
compiled languages. But interpreted languages don't necessarily have
them, as witnessed by Java and Perl. You have to get your REPL as a
third party package for those languages.

<mike

 

[Adam DePrince]

Is a Ferrari similar to a horse-wagon? Yes, they both have 4 wheels.

No, it is not better than a horse. The horse is more reliable and on
any given day you can count on it going further before it needs service.

Or were you comparing a Ferrari to a Mustang ... in which case, yes,
good analogy.

- Adam

Adam DePrince

 

[Thomas Bartkus]

> On what basis do you think the mechanics of producing a working
> language are easier because the language is interpreted. <snip>

Because:
Type code
Run code.

Is easier to explain to the uninitiated than
Type Code,
compile code,
make executable,
run executable.

And - if a beginner is asking the question, there is no point getting mired
in an arcane discussion about all the in between mix and match flavors that
are constantly at play in the programming world.

As I said -
"Interpreted languages are bit more approachable for beginners"
Thomas Bartkus

 

[Gregor Horvath]

Because:
Type code
Run code.

VB6 goes a step further:

Run Code
Type Code

That means that you can set a breakpoint. While the debugger stops you
can edit the sourcecode (to some extent) without stopping program
execution and let the interpreter run this new code without restarting
the program.
Essentially you can code inside the debugger. That gives you the
possibilty to fix a bug on the fly since on an exception the debugger
stops at the wrong line. Try different possibilities and see the result
immediatly in the given context.

That would be an nice feature for python (debugger), because this is
true interactive development.

Or is it already there and I missed it?

 

[Alan Gauld]

That means that you can set a breakpoint. While the debugger stops you
can edit the sourcecode (to some extent) without stopping program
execution and let the interpreter run this new code without restarting
the program.

You can do that in C/C++ in some environments (within limits).
About 11 years ago I used a C++ IDE called ObjectCenter which
included a C/C++ interpreter and ran on my Sun workstation. It
was pretty cool for the time and worked quite happily on my
350Kloc C program...

If C can do it I'm sure it must be feasible in python!

Alan G.
Author of the Learn to Program website
http://www.freenetpages.co.uk/hp/alan.gauld