Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

13
  • BASIC-PLUS on RSTS/E was not compiled, though there actually was a COMPILE command... but all it did was store your .BAS file also as a .BAC, which was the tokenized form of your program (and unreadable as a text file). So it would be smaller and quicker to load, and you could in theory distribute it without revealing your source code. Commented May 14, 2018 at 22:53
  • I never used BASIC on a VAX but are you sure you are not talking about BASIC-PLUS 2? I thought that’s what has the “structured” programming syntax (no line numbers) and had the real compiler. Commented May 14, 2018 at 22:55
  • "So, I don't know how on RSTS/E BASIC-PLUS manifested these statements internally" = well now you've REALLY piqued my interest! I think maybe its worth asking some of my PDP-11 gurus to do just that. Commented May 15, 2018 at 17:32
  • @MauryMarkowitz I actually fired up SIMH to take a peek. It's not self evident how to convince BASIC to read a file and write a crude HEX dump program. I was trying to dump a .BAC file. It's clear to me that when you type "LIST", it simply dumps a local text buffer (vs what MS does). And, you know, it's been, well, a long time and "One does not simply pick up TECO" -- Boromir. Commented May 15, 2018 at 18:06
  • @WillHartung - Am I correct in thinking the VAX version was B+2, not the original interpreted version? If so, there may not be any downside to these structures. Commented May 16, 2018 at 13:45