Edit - Retrocomputing Stack Exchange

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

5

I think this answer is to the point. The question seems to have an implicit assumption that an implementation 'should' use the maximum number possible under some chosen hardware representation. However, the 'B' in 'BASIC' suggests to me that a better-off choice is based in user considerations, and a limit of 99999 is thus more sensible (easier to explain to users) than say 131071 would be.

dave
– dave

2020-01-15 12:49:59 +00:00
Commented Jan 15, 2020 at 12:49

Add a comment |

Correct minor typos or mistakes
Clarify meaning without changing it
Add related resources or links
Always respect the author’s intent
Don’t use edits to reply to the author

create code fences with backticks ` or tildes ~
```
like so
```
add language identifier to highlight code
```python
def function(foo):
print(foo)
```
put returns between paragraphs
for linebreak add 2 spaces at end
_italic_ or **bold**
quote by placing > at start of line
to make links (use https whenever possible)

<https://example.com>

[example](https://example.com)

<a href="https://example.com">example</a>

formatting help »
answering help »