XPost: comp.lang.c++   
   From: david.brown@hesbynett.no   
      
   On 11/02/2026 06:54, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:   
   > On Tue, 10 Feb 2026 20:07:37 -0600, Lynn McGuire wrote:   
   >   
   >> One of my long term goals is to support a Basic interpreter in my   
   >> calculation engine.   
   >   
   > Gosh. That would take you up to the Middle Ages.   
      
   Why are you being so hard on the guy?  He started a thread that has had   
   broad appeal and interest, and successfully pulled in participants from   
   two language groups in an amicable discussion.  He has been nothing but   
   open and honest, discussing his company's design choices and giving   
   reasons for them (whether they are good technical reasons or not).   
      
   A Basic or Basic-like interpreter can be a very useful addition to large   
   software.  It can make it easy to write small snippets or scripts for   
   automation purposes, and can be learned quickly and easily even by those   
   with no programming experience.  It's a language that has scaled from   
   microcontrollers to mainframes.  There are plenty of alternatives for   
   embedded languages in software, but let the guy who knows the program,   
   the code, the development team, the company, its customers, and the   
   software's market pick the best choice (or choices).  Stop   
   second-guessing him just because you read a Wikipedia page.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)