[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Date Index Thread Index Search archive:
Date:Mon Nov 20 11:14:52 1992 
Subject:Re: Ok, so pop *pop* may be a valid lang, but where's basic? 
From:Steve Pitchers 
Volume-ID:921121.01 

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!