BASIC

The point here is not to advance an alternative theory of program memorization, but to show that 10 PRINT represents a category of programs that were historically memorized but which existing theories of program memorization, created for longer program and for programs that model business processes, do not cover. The memorization of BASIC one-liners was rather long-term, was done for fun, and of course involved very short programs. This type of memorization has certain things in common with the type done in these memorization studies, but it may also relate to the way people memorize jokes, proverbs, and other folk texts. These studies do at least show how people can remember key statements (beacons) and the high-level workings of a program without memorizing it character by character. Also, the appearance of program variants that work identically but are written differently is consistent with studies on and theories of program memorization. And, essentially, the studies demonstrate that program memorization is possible and that many people may have carried 10 PRINT into a Commodore 64's memory by using their own.

The point here is not to advance an alternative theory of program memorization, but to show that 10 PRINT represents a category of programs that were historically memorized but which existing theories of program memorization, created for longer program and for programs that model business processes, do not cover. The memorization of BASIC one-liners was rather long-term, was done for fun, and of course involved very short programs. This type of memorization has certain things in common with the type done in these memorization studies, but it may also relate to the way people memorize jokes, proverbs, and other folk texts. These studies do at least show how people can remember key statements (beacons) and the high-level workings of a program without memorizing it character by character. Also, the appearance of program variants that work identically but are written differently is consistent with studies on and theories of program memorization. And, essentially, the studies demonstrate that program memorization is possible and that many people may have carried 10 PRINT into a Commodore 64's memory by using their own.

When I first wrote about a similarly-functioning program, I presented this version: <code>10 PRINT CHR$(109+RND(1)*2); : GOTO 10</code>. That's the program I discussed very briefly in my article "Obfuscated Code" in ''Software Studies: A Lexicon,'' and that's the same text I presented to Mark Marino's online Critical Code Studies Workshop, where it sparked the discussion that led to this book. It does the same thing as our title program, for two reasons: First, 205 and 206 are mapped to the same characters as 109 and 110; second, adding a random number between 0 and 2 does the same thing, due to rounding, as adding .5 and then also adding a random number between 0 and 1. The version we are using in the title of this book is based on (although not identical to) two early print sources for the program, the three-line program in the ''Commodore 64 Users Guide'' and the one-line version in ''RUN Magazine.'' There are no print sources from the 1980s that we have found that use "RND(1)*2" or that use 109 and 110 rather than 205 and 206.

When I first wrote about a similarly-functioning program, I presented this version: <code>10 PRINT CHR$(109+RND(1)*2); : GOTO 10</code>. That's the program I discussed very briefly in my article "Obfuscated Code" in ''Software Studies: A Lexicon,'' and that's the same text I presented to Mark Marino's online Critical Code Studies Workshop, where it sparked the discussion that led to this book. It does the same thing as our title program, for two reasons: First, 205 and 206 are mapped to the same characters as 109 and 110; second, adding a random number between 0 and 2 does the same thing, due to rounding, as adding .5 and then also adding a random number between 0 and 1. The version we are using in the title of this book is based on (although not identical to) two early print sources for the program, the three-line program in the ''Commodore 64 Users Guide'' and the one-line version in ''RUN Magazine.'' There are no print sources from the 1980s that we have found that use "RND(1)*2" or that use 109 and 110 rather than 205 and 206.

Our discussion of this program is based on the print versions of it that I found early in the process of working on this book -- but the version of the program that started our discussion came from my memory.

Our discussion of this program is based on the print versions of it that I found early in the process of working on this book -- but the version of the program that started our discussion came from my memory.

== Works Cited ==

== Works Cited ==