DW> Clearly, your first paragraph above is true. However, my point is
DW> that  there are languages which are so unlike BASIC in their
DW> fundamental  concepts and structures that, if fluency in one of
DW> these languages is  the ultimate goal, practicing with QB may turn
DW> out to be more of a  hindrance than a help. If you want to speak
DW> Chinese, it's not much use  learning Spanish first!
     Allow me, please, to disagree with you a little.
My first programming experience was in the early 50's
(the subject line is OLD FOLKS!) using a main frame.
We did it all in machine language.  That language had
very little direct bearing on my learning BASIC 30
years later.  Or a bit of Assembler a couple of years
after that.
     In the message just before this one, I answered a
question about how to tell if a certain bit was on.  I
answered: do it with Boolean Algebra's AND operator.
Now that's something I learned in machine language and
which applies to BASIC, Assembler, and the rest.  It
wouldn't matter what a person's first (computer)
language was, some principles will apply to all.  My
first language taught me Logical Thinking - which is
sometimes counter-intuitive.  It taught me that if a
routine is not working as I intended it to work, to sit
down with paper and pencil, pretend that _I_ am a
computer, and go thru the routine step by step seeing
exactly what the computer is seeing.  I can (usually)
find the problem that way.
     I believe that the more languages one learns, the
easier each should become.  Some basic principles will
run thru them, and one will learn to recognize that
differences do exist.
     Learning Spanish may not be of much help learning
Chinese, but it may help in learning Latin, French, and
other Romance Languages.  After learning several of
them, that may help in learning Chinese.  If nothing
else, it teaches that there are other constructs,
sentence orders, ways of saying the same thing.  The
same could be said for far-apart computer languages.
     I started BASIC with Benton Harbor BASIC, followed
by MicroSoft MSBASIC, GWBasic, & QuickBASIC.  I used
some Assembly when I had the Heathkit H89 only because
MSBASIC was not compilable and Assembly could run so
much faster:  I could cut an hour down to 10 minutes or
less!  Now, I am well satisfied with QB (and PDS) and
for what I do have not needed to get into higher level
languages: BASIC does what I want.  For a younger
person who is interested in learning programming, I
would recommend BASIC (QB) as a good beginning,
followed by several other popular languages.  One will
find BASIC principles thru them all!
  FIDO: Bill White @ 1:135/110 (Miami)
 InterNet: bill.white@110.sunshine.com
 * SLMR 2.1a * Never grab a falling knife!
--- Maximus 2.01wb
---------------