Does Arduino support both BASIC and C language

What is inline asm?

The Arduino environment provides essentially "C" programming capabilities.
The Arduino hardware is capable of running any number of languages, including BASIC, given suitable software on the host side, or some kind of interpreter loaded into the CPU. One interpreter providing a BASIC-like syntax is Bitlash
I'm not aware of any BASIC vendors (or OSSW) that specifically provides Arduino HW support for their system...

If I want to do this learning process of learning the languages I'd programming do I need to learn them in some sort of order from BASIC to C or do I just need to learn that one language

The Arduino IDE uses GCC so read C++ texts.
Also the Arduino reference and tutorials.
The arduino based stuff is the way to go, if you already know programming concepts, you can pick up the syntax in the tutorials and reference examples.

http://www.cplusplus.com/doc/tutorial/

The Arduino is programmed in C/C++. You need not learn BASIC to use it.

Well as the name implies BASIC is easier to learn. At the risk of steering you away from Arduino the DuinoMite boards

Can be programmed directly in BASIC.

However if you learn C that's a way more powerful language than any BASIC you are likely to find on a $35 board, C is harder to learn but the process is simplified a lot by using an Arduino and there are 100s of people on this forum that will help.


Rob

as the name implies BASIC is easier to learn.

I don't actually believe that to be true. Originally, an interactive BASIC interpreter was MUCH easier to use than a batch FORTRAN or COBOL compiler. And most BASICs probably give you better error messages when you've done something wrong (a particular weakness of C/C++.) But overall "easier" ?? Nah...

interactive BASIC interpreter

That's the sort of thing you get with the DuinoMite-style boards and I think that would be easier than the way we used to learn C, ie with no forums, a cross-compiler, and a screen with

main() {

}

written on it. Hmmm now what?

But yes these days with the Arduino you don't have that problem as there are many examples that work out of the box so it's easy to start with say the blink example and play with it to get an idea of how C works. Then work your way up asking questions along the way.

Bottom line then, learn C.

PS: has the original post changed, it no longer mentions BASIC.


Rob

Who was the computer scientist (Donald Knuth?) that said that someone that learned BASIC as a first language was forever ruined for becoming a 'proper' programmer!

Jim

Dijkstra. In 1975. I doubt that you'll find a modern BASIC implementation that is quite as bad as the BASICs of 1975. And he seems to have been rather equally dismayed by most of the other languages of the time. Except ALGOL...

(Hmm. I'll bet that there is less Algol written today than Fortran or Cobol or BASIC. But that's because many newer better languages were derived from Algol, but didn't keep the name...)

Circa 1970

Did anybody hear about or use Snobol. That was a cool language for manipulating strings by using "pattern matching". You can still get it for free as Snobol4, a version for the PC, he, he. 8)

I heard of it, but I preferred TECO. :slight_smile:

I think Forth would be good.

I heard of it, but I preferred TECO. :slight_smile:

For the PDP-11 and ... Tape Editor and COrrector.

Must've been fun. Never had a chance to use it. :slight_smile:

I did write a PDP-8 simulator in Fortran for the UofM, Ann Arbor Dual IBM 360-67 (tightly coupled) MTS Terminal System at the time. And that ... was FUN!

Go blue!

I did write a PDP-8 simulator i

But without the physicality of toggling-in your program, it just isn't the same experience.

But without the physicality of toggling-in your program, it just isn't the same experience.

True, true, AWOL, :slight_smile:

But later on ... I also built an MITS Altair 8800 Kit; and there I got the physicality of toggling the switches for the booloader, in octal. Wow, what a great experience! To bad I sold my Altair to the M.I.T. (but this is the Monterrey Institute of Technology, now in their museum) just to get the money to buy an ISC's Intecolor 8001 and have a PC with colors. RED ALERT!, Star Trek, you know 8)

I guess, I chose poooooorly. Altair 8800 PC's are selling high on eBay. I wish I still had mine and still be able to toggle those switches and DEPOSIT :frowning:

Also sprach Zaratustra, Dave!

There were actually subtly different versions of TECO (from DEC) for PDP8 (12bits), PDP11 (16bits), and PDP10 (36bits.)
Then there was MIT TECO for the PDP10, which was substantially different. That's what the first version of EMACS was written in...
I only actually used TECO on PDP10s. Somewhere out on the net is a copy of the source code for TECO v124 (UTexas?), with a chunk of my email file where some of the source code should be (some sort of disk or backup error. oops.)
I didn't love it enough to ever use the version that floating around for modern unix, though...

How FORTRAN on punch cards? Had to do that for a freshman year college class.
Error messages back were even less useful than the IDE error messages!

CrossRoads:
How FORTRAN on punch cards? Had to do that for a freshman year college class.
Error messages back were even less useful than the IDE error messages!

I too took a night class at a local Jr. College in FORTRAN programming in the 70s. Typed source on a IBM 029 keypunch, wait in line to submit job to comppile and run on a IBM 1130, wait for job to be entered and return to find out results, usually didn't even compile because of some missing directive card or something. That was a painful class just because of the lack of a real-time inactive interface we now take for granted. :wink: