Author |
Topic: LBB timeline and status (Read 1514 times) |
|
joker
Global Moderator
member is offline
Gender: 
Posts: 157
|
 |
Re: LBB timeline and status
« Reply #15 on: Nov 17th, 2015, 3:23pm » |
|
Quote:| Having multiple 'competitive' implementations of a programming language is healthy; it hasn't done Fortran, C, Pascal and BBC BASIC - to name but a few - any harm! |
|
Perhaps, in an altruistic way, but not in a commercial product as LB is.
|
|
 Logged
|
|
|
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline
Posts: 1348
|
|
Re: LBB timeline and status
« Reply #16 on: Nov 17th, 2015, 4:09pm » |
|
on Nov 17th, 2015, 3:23pm, pnlawrence wrote:| Perhaps, in an altruistic way, but not in a commercial product as LB is. |
|
What makes you say that? Do you think C or Pascal have somehow 'suffered' from the proliferation of implementations from different vendors? Would you rather that Visual C or GCC, say, had a monopoly of the market for Windows C compilers?
My view is the complete opposite. Without competition commercial products, especially, can stagnate; indeed you can argue that's exactly what has happened to Liberty BASIC. Of course in the case of LB, instead of the competition from LBB stimulating Carl to improve his product, his 'supporters' are trying to shield him from it.
Quote:| Generations of young programmers have grown up without putting a dime in the coffers for the development of Basic in general. |
|
Surely that isn't correct. Look at the way BASIC (and BBC BASIC in particular) has been influential in the teaching of programming in schools in the UK since the 1980s. Although that has declined significantly in the intervening years, even today BBC BASIC is one of only a few languages which are approved by the relevant UK authorities as being suitable for teaching programming. This student's book has a whole chapter on BBC BASIC.
Quote:| without a revenue stream of its own. I'm assuming that has always been by design |
|
Indeed it has never been, and never will be, my intention that LBB should provide a "revenue stream". I have a commercial product (BBC BASIC), although even that does not exist primarily as a source of income. You have referred to "obsessions", I wonder if you are unduly preoccupied with financial considerations.
Richard.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
joker
Global Moderator
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 157
|
|
Re: LBB timeline and status
« Reply #17 on: Nov 17th, 2015, 4:53pm » |
|
Quote:I wonder if you are unduly preoccupied with financial considerations. {my edit} |
|
Well, of course! 
I understand the controversy that the LB supporters have created, but I think you could easily ignore it if you had a larger user base. Especially one that was supporting further development.
Actually, I really don't understand why Mr. Gundel isn't desperately involved in some kind of merger of LB and LBB. Especially since you've expressed your interest in moving it into the public domain.
It is hard for me to understand that you don't see my " Generations of young programmers " comment as a cause for Basic " has declined significantly in the intervening years ". We have so many devices running now, and I dare to say next to none of them can be programmed from/with Basic.
As Basic is my only programming language, it even sounds strange to me that I'm being such a "booBird." I am trying to get my son and potentially my grandson involved with programming, but the draw for them is to gadgets like the PI.
I'm starting to wonder why I'm messing with LB and not learning BBC Basic straight on. 
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
