Come on, everybody, let's let this drop!
Whether Pop deserves a place in the comp.lang heirarchy has absolutely
nothing to do with whether BASIC deserves a place.
The comp.long.pop group is perfectly legit after having been through the
correct procedures (as far as I am aware). Let's not get into a "Pop/BASIC
is best" competition. If you want a comp.lang.basic group then let's have
a proper vote on it -- leave comp.lang.pop alone!
Steve --- pitchers@prl.philips.co.uk
~~~
PS: For the record, I used to spend many happy hours programming in
various forms of BASIC. What I most liked about it was that it was so
easy to write complex software in very short timescales. I still remain
a fan of BASIC, even though I never use it anymore.
When I discovered Pop11, I immediately realised that Pop is even better
for fast prototyping than BASIC is IMHO. I was also surprised to find
that the variety of structured techniques easily available to you easily
outstrips any other language that I have come into contact with. The
legitimacy of Pop11 is beyond doubt!
|