The DU Lounge
Related: Culture Forums, Support ForumsThomas E. Kurtz, a Creator of BASIC Computer Language, Dies at 96
Kenneth R. Rosen
Paywalled NYTimes article.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/16/technology/thomas-kurtz-dead.html
Back in the 1980's I used BASIC to program computers and then went to college for Electronic Technology. His BASIC language inspired me to learn more.
10 Print "thanks mate"
20 goto 10
run
dgauss
(1,189 posts)gay texan
(2,925 posts)dgauss
(1,189 posts)maybe you'd have to account for a spool of perforated paper. Pretty harmless.
canuckledragger
(1,992 posts)That sequence was the very first program I learned to do myself.
Sadly, my programming skills never really got much beyond that, but fiddling with things like that gave me a life-long interest in computers in general, and have been building my own since my 20's
Sad to see the creator passed away. End of an era.
dgauss
(1,189 posts)Don't remember exactly what the course was, maybe a dedicated programming course, maybe part of something a little broader.
But it was one of those classes I looked forward to. Just the idea that it was possible to put together this string of logic that could actually DO things in the real world was exciting (once you figured out where your initial attempt went wrong and corrected it).
I also really enjoyed the term "spaghetti code" which I think was mostly the result of the GOTO command.
In any case, thanks Thomas E. Kurtz.
Jacson6
(953 posts)You would return to the main program to avoid creating loops that would make the C64/C128 crash.
dgauss
(1,189 posts)You could pretty much goto anywhere at any time.
Intractable
(729 posts)Post #1 is funny, but it results in an infinite loop. These are not allowed.
Otto_Harper
(776 posts)As long as you apply them correctly. In my pre-BASIC days, I can recall writing a program that used an infinite loop to do housekeeping until an outside interrupt occurred. The interrupt would cause it to GOTO another piece of code, to service the interruption.
The interrupt was signalled by a variable suddenly changing value within the loop, due to actions from the OS. The problem with that code arose when folks started using the new IBM optimizing compiler. The compiler saw that there was nothing inside the loop that changed the variable, and so moved the test to outside of the loop to improve efficiency. Result was a complete loss of control into an infinite loop. On a mainframe. Which cost real money for processor time.
SWBTATTReg
(24,565 posts)languages we used. And it was so easy to use too.
RIP, Mr. Kurtz.
duncang
(3,765 posts)Playing the game with the gorilla tossing bananas, hangman, checking amortization tables, and hating edlin. Didnt know much but goofed with basic a little. 5.0 and edit what a upgrade.