Re: which langs have more than 1 compilers?
From: kyle york (kyork_at_cisco.com)
Date: 08/13/04
- Next message: Programmer Dude: "Re: Static vs. Dynamic typing (big advantage or not)---WAS: c.programming: OOP and memory management"
- Previous message: alessandro: "Re: Should we STOP using google?"
- In reply to: CBFalconer: "Re: which langs have more than 1 compilers?"
- Next in thread: Jack Klein: "Re: which langs have more than 1 compilers?"
- Reply: Jack Klein: "Re: which langs have more than 1 compilers?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:04:24 -0700
Greetings,
CBFalconer wrote:
>
> Basic has changed at the whim of Microsoft. This bears no
> resemblance to evolution. It is not a language, because it lacks
> an accepted standard.
Odd, I thought ANS X3.60-1978 defined ANSI Minimal BASIC, and can think
of many version of basic with no relationship to MS.
-- Kyle A. York Sr. Subordinate Grunt
- Next message: Programmer Dude: "Re: Static vs. Dynamic typing (big advantage or not)---WAS: c.programming: OOP and memory management"
- Previous message: alessandro: "Re: Should we STOP using google?"
- In reply to: CBFalconer: "Re: which langs have more than 1 compilers?"
- Next in thread: Jack Klein: "Re: which langs have more than 1 compilers?"
- Reply: Jack Klein: "Re: which langs have more than 1 compilers?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
