REPORTS TOWARD STANDARDIZATION OF BASIC Thomas E. Kurtz and Stephen J. Garland Dartmough College, Hanover, New Hampshire We at Dartmouth are in substantial agreement with the substance of Mr. Ogdin's article in the September i issue of DATAMATION, quibble with its title "The Case Against and out-of-context although we might ... BASIC" and with the interspersed We certainly do comments used by the DATAMATION editor. not feel that BASIC has "suffered irreparable damage" or that is has "effectively been killed as an industry-wide language"; its current popularWe agree with ity in the educational community alone attests to the contrary. Mr. Ogdin that the current state of affairs caused by poor or divergent implementations is rapidly becoming intolerable. But surely the proper solu- tion is to standardize BASIC, not to abandon it. We disagree with the assertion that it might be too late to standardize. After all, you can't standardize until you are sure you have a product worth standardizing. BASIC has gone through many changes and metamorphoses since it first appeared in 1964. Many features - some good, some bad - have been Here at provided in alternative ways by different implementations. Dartmouth we have gone through at
/lp/association-for-computing-machinery/toward-standardization-of-basic-SLsb4XmChF