It was 30 years ago, so I'm afraid I cannot remember how I did it. The floppy disk drives did chatter a bit though.
Bit like us - just read this thread from the beginning and compared it to others and the running motifs seem to be:
1) All programming is good
2) BASIC is how many of us started and some parents and teachers may already be familiar with it
3) BASIC does many things well
4) Although similar in many respects Python does extra things that BASIC can't
5) Python is acknowledged by universities
6) Many people think Python is more elegant and stylish
7) Many people do not realise that BASIC has evolved to incorporate many of these structures
8) People are turned off by too many BASIC dialects
I accept that times have changed, but I feel a bit uncomfortable about that.
I think BASIC's strength is in being basic. I question whether for an interpreted language a comprehensive set of abstract control structures is actually a good thing. GCC is fantastic at optamising during the compile process so I can see a reason for layers of abstraction in a compiled language, but if you are using an interpreter (or 'virtual machine') that converts programmed (or 'scripted') instructions to machine code on the fly, then perhaps there is an argument for keeping the language primative and meeting the cpu half way.
I am tempted to re-visit BASIC V under RISC OS for performance reasons as it has such a small footprint and as the interpreter runs in the cache and can accept assembly instructions.
I accept that that is not most peoples cup of tea, or necessarily a good way to learn programming and that modern processors are faster by an order of magnitude, so speed is not so much an issue as it used to be.
Despite this, and perhaps this is just an irrational emotional old fashioned view, I wonder whether all this 'good programming grammar and flow' is from the machine's perspective complicated bloat.
I guess not if using a python compiler - do they exist?