Ask HN: Why isn't Javascript the new BASIC?
13 comments
I'm sorry if this might be slightly off-topic, as it focusses on the 'new BASIC' part of your question. However, the points outlined might be helpful to understand why Javascript isn't the best first language for pedagogy.
Compared to most languages, Python is possibly the best contender to the title of 'new BASIC'. It has an implementation that is more consistent than Javascript's and can even scale up to larger code-bases. The latter, I learnt in my early days, will soon become a necessity when it becomes difficult to keep track of your 20K lines of BASIC code!
Python could be a gateway to both server-side and client-side programmer. The latter could be useful while learning programming and can provide instant gratification with full-screen graphics say using Pygame/Pyglet. When the young programmer becomes confident enough that he wants to let his friends play with his creations, he can create web-apps using Python (say using Django), which seems to be the distribution mechanism of choice, going forward.
I agree that having an IDE is perhaps not a necessity compared to a REPL. There have been IDEs like Turbo Pascal which have near instantaneous compile times, but the learners tend to become overly dependent on IDEs. They are often unable to distinguish between the IDE and language, which is clearly undesirable.
Python works well with modest requirements. It has several REPL implementations (for e.g. the excellent ipython). On the other hand development is breezy even with simple syntax highlighting editor (for e.g. Notepad++).
Javascript has several gotchas which might confuse or dissuade a learner. I think this is a hangover from its early implementations than a language flaw per se. However, it prevents me from recommending it to a beginner.
Compared to most languages, Python is possibly the best contender to the title of 'new BASIC'. It has an implementation that is more consistent than Javascript's and can even scale up to larger code-bases. The latter, I learnt in my early days, will soon become a necessity when it becomes difficult to keep track of your 20K lines of BASIC code!
Python could be a gateway to both server-side and client-side programmer. The latter could be useful while learning programming and can provide instant gratification with full-screen graphics say using Pygame/Pyglet. When the young programmer becomes confident enough that he wants to let his friends play with his creations, he can create web-apps using Python (say using Django), which seems to be the distribution mechanism of choice, going forward.
I agree that having an IDE is perhaps not a necessity compared to a REPL. There have been IDEs like Turbo Pascal which have near instantaneous compile times, but the learners tend to become overly dependent on IDEs. They are often unable to distinguish between the IDE and language, which is clearly undesirable.
Python works well with modest requirements. It has several REPL implementations (for e.g. the excellent ipython). On the other hand development is breezy even with simple syntax highlighting editor (for e.g. Notepad++).
Javascript has several gotchas which might confuse or dissuade a learner. I think this is a hangover from its early implementations than a language flaw per se. However, it prevents me from recommending it to a beginner.
In chrome, just type Ctrl+Shift+J (Cmd+Opt+J on Mac) and there's a wonderful JS console
The problem with JavaScript (ECMAscript) is that it is a language that is defined without libraries - collection of objects. DOM, etc are objects that you manipulate with the language and it "provided" by the web browser.
BASIC appealed because it came with simple built-in objects (the weren't called that) which allowed for easy programming with quick visual display. And of course, the expectations weren't has high back then either.
BASIC appealed because it came with simple built-in objects (the weren't called that) which allowed for easy programming with quick visual display. And of course, the expectations weren't has high back then either.
Wasn't it _why who said that coding for the web is hard to get into because it requires 3 languages? (javascript, css, html; loosest definition of "language"). Plus understanding how they fit together; DOM etc. Plus portability.
People didn't use IDEs with their BASIC in 1985, so your jump to IDEs may miss the point. But my 1983 BASIC interpreter let me draw a point or a diagonal line anywhere on the screen; all I had to know was how to get into graphics mode and how to specify coordinates. 2 lines of code. If you write the same thing in javascript+html+css, how many lines will it take you?
In the meantime, at least there's http://logo.twentygototen.org/
People didn't use IDEs with their BASIC in 1985, so your jump to IDEs may miss the point. But my 1983 BASIC interpreter let me draw a point or a diagonal line anywhere on the screen; all I had to know was how to get into graphics mode and how to specify coordinates. 2 lines of code. If you write the same thing in javascript+html+css, how many lines will it take you?
In the meantime, at least there's http://logo.twentygototen.org/
Exactly, with the BASIC in my Spectrum (1984) I was able to draw over the whole screen in full resolution (at that time even the very "bitmapped" screens were novelty, other computers had special regime for drawings and another for letters -- Mac, who broke that, came only in 1984, PC users stopped using text modes only with Windows, which got popular only around 1990) -- one single statement to draw the line, one single statement to draw the circle... to put that in the loop you needed only two lines more, or you could even write it in the same line. And no special editor needed, you just type, press Enter, and the result appeared immediately. And no icons, no toolbars, title bars... Command, result. Or a few lines of program, result. Try now to draw something. Try to produce the sounds of notes with it. It was simple, now it's not, that's why it's not THAT.
It's sad that it's so hard these days to do some basic stuff, like only a few typed words to draw something etc.
Today even languages that should be simple aren't. Import libraries, reference modules, only to evaluate abs(-2)? Failure of modern language incarnations...
Learning a modern IDE is more work than learning an 80's BASIC environment. The difference is that with the latter, I could write working programs and get stuff flying around the screen with minimal resistance.
There's a lot of value in that simplicity that is still there somewhere but isn't generally accessible for anything "productive" by today's standards.
There's a lot of value in that simplicity that is still there somewhere but isn't generally accessible for anything "productive" by today's standards.
Just so you know... we put a Turtlescript DSL into Hackety Hack: http://github.com/hacketyhack/hacketyhack/blob/master/sample...
Akshell (http://www.akshell.com) might fit the bill.
The name mislead me to believe that it had something to do with haskell. I guess I thought too deeply into the anagram.
As joeyh said, jumping to an IDE seems premature. But another problem is the lack of need. Back in 1980, there just were not that many games and other apps. A computer was more or less an extension of electronics and was driven by "How does this thing work?". Now, computers are appliances. And even the most reliable appliances, as the old Maytag adverts used to show, require trained "technicians". But I, too, wonder how to recupe that wonder of "How things work" for the up-and-coming ranks of hackers.
Back in the 80's, people who wanted computers were geeks. Now everybody an his dog uses a computer; geeks are a tiny part of the whole. I suppose that geeks who want to know how things work, well, just learn it one way or another. the remaining 90% of the population won't ever know shit on how a computer works, because they're absolutely not interested in this matter.
I think this is the answer. JS is the new BASIC - or a new BASIC, anyway - but it is harder to tell because the audience is more diffuse, and mixed up with so many other audiences.
In the earliest days of PCs it was easy to spot the BASIC programmers: most people who owned a PC learned a little. What else was there to do with it? And computers were expensive, so odds were that if you owned one you were pretty fond of computers.
Now the situation is like that in music: we are in a golden age of programming, but it is hard to appreciate because it is so diffuse and varied: The equivalent of the big arena rock show isn't there.
In the earliest days of PCs it was easy to spot the BASIC programmers: most people who owned a PC learned a little. What else was there to do with it? And computers were expensive, so odds were that if you owned one you were pretty fond of computers.
Now the situation is like that in music: we are in a golden age of programming, but it is hard to appreciate because it is so diffuse and varied: The equivalent of the big arena rock show isn't there.
fxj meet jsFiddle (http://www.jsfiddle.net), jsFiddle meet fxj.
very nice. seems to have great potential. a good starting point.
BASIC was the first language I did anything with. I was a co-op during college at this company that made 4 wheel drive systems and they were working on an electronically controlled transfer case.
I was given the task of importing raw data captured at the test track into very uninformative spreadsheets. I wrote macros to generate charts presenting all the different parameters. Also very uninformative.
I came up with a much better way to present the data using BASIC. I drew a picture of a car with 4 wheels. The front wheels turned and the rear wheels flashed when they lost traction. I had a bar graph showing for the engine and a transfer case that flashed when power shifted to the front end. You could vary the speed, run it in a loop and even run it backward.
With this you could actually see the wheels turning under power starting to break loose and system responding to correct it. Just one problem when they got it to the test track and looked at data immediately after a test instead of weeks later: The steering rack actually turns in the opposite direction that the wheels do, so the wheels turned in the wrong direction!
Thanks, BASIC. good times :-)
I was given the task of importing raw data captured at the test track into very uninformative spreadsheets. I wrote macros to generate charts presenting all the different parameters. Also very uninformative.
I came up with a much better way to present the data using BASIC. I drew a picture of a car with 4 wheels. The front wheels turned and the rear wheels flashed when they lost traction. I had a bar graph showing for the engine and a transfer case that flashed when power shifted to the front end. You could vary the speed, run it in a loop and even run it backward.
With this you could actually see the wheels turning under power starting to break loose and system responding to correct it. Just one problem when they got it to the test track and looked at data immediately after a test instead of weeks later: The steering rack actually turns in the opposite direction that the wheels do, so the wheels turned in the wrong direction!
Thanks, BASIC. good times :-)
You don't need IDE, all you need is REPL.
BASIC offered REPL with primitive line editor.
You can use JS REPL:
http://www.jconsole.com/
jconsole (based on JavaScript Shell 1.4) Features: autocompletion of property names with Tab, multiline input with Shift+Enter, input history with (Ctrl+) Up/Down, Math, help Values and functions: ans, print(string), props(object), blink(node), clear(), load(scriptURL), scope(object)
5 * 5
25
f = function(X) { return XX; }
function (X) { return X X; }
f(5)
25
print("Hello, World!")
Hello, World!
http://www.jconsole.com/
jconsole (based on JavaScript Shell 1.4) Features: autocompletion of property names with Tab, multiline input with Shift+Enter, input history with (Ctrl+) Up/Down, Math, help Values and functions: ans, print(string), props(object), blink(node), clear(), load(scriptURL), scope(object)
5 * 5
25
f = function(X) { return XX; }
function (X) { return X X; }
f(5)
25
print("Hello, World!")
Hello, World!
If you're looking for something like 80's Basic then I recommend trying out Processing. It has a reasonable IDE and the graphics commands are very similar.
Processing.js would work too but it needs an IDE.
Processing.js would work too but it needs an IDE.
Where is mode 13 in JavaScript?
Why, for heavens sake, has nobody written a decent self-contained JavaScript IDE that we all can use right away?
Write a HTML5 application that serves as an IDE with all the bells and whistles that JavaScript supports today. jQuery could be part of it. A GUI Editor could be part of it. The whole app could be self-modifiable. And you could store it in a zipped bookmarklet. Services like www.laterloop.com show how to do that. You could distribute the little programs on your website without need for apples app shop. Hell, we could make our own app show and apple could not do anything against it. The apps would run on all platforms that support JavaScript and a decent subset of HTML5.
So where are the top JavaScript programmers that make this a reality? The next generation of young hackers is waiting desperately for it (even they don't know that they do).