Tiny Basic again

From: Don Maslin <donm_at_cts.com>
Date: Tue Mar 16 15:29:42 1999

On 16 Mar 1999, Eric Smith wrote:

> > I did a search of the net for Tiny Basic and only found
> > references to the history of Tiny Basic and some site
> > that had something called Tiny Basic that was only 7K!
> > I guess they missed the point, it ain't tiny unless it
> > is smaller than 2K. Lets get real, 7K is only 1K smaller
> > than 8K which is a standard sized basic.
> Heck, "standard sized BASIC" came in 4K, 8K, and 12K variants.
> IIRC, those were the memory sizes needed to run them and still
> have at least a small amount of memory left over for your
> program.

Volume 2 of the CPMUG lists a Tinybasic at 3k. The docs run 12k.

                                                 - don
> But yes, if 7K is considered "Tiny BASIC", I should write a
> 6K "Miniscule BASIC"!
> I guess it's just a symptom of the general software inflation that has
> occurred. Everything has become bloated and inefficient.
> That "Tiny BASIC" isn't written in C++, by any chance? :-)
Received on Tue Mar 16 1999 - 15:29:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:32:20 BST