| Re: a relational database done in forth would r0ck |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: comp.lang.forth · Group Profile
Author: John PassanitiJohn Passaniti Date: Aug 27, 2008 10:20
Bernd Paysan wrote:
> They changed the approach.
So again, I'm trying to figure out how you feel this story relates to my
point. My point, again, is that approach matters far more than
language. If your story was that the Java programmers took the *same*
approach of the Forth programmers (presumably building only what they
needed) and *then* failed, then your story would counter my statement.
> Unfortunately, in reality, most non-Forth projects don't end up with a
> Forth-like solution. Cultures are different, and many people stay in
> theirs. That's why I tend to agree with your statement that you *can*
> (theoretically) implement Forth-like solutions in other languages, but in
> reality, this usually won't happen.
But again, this has little to do with language. It has to do with the
skill and experience of the programmers.
I don't have a problem with the notion that different languages have
different cultures that drive different priorities which can produce
wildly different results. In the Java world, I've seen programmers
produce slow, bloated crap. And that's usually because the programmers
don't have an awareness of the cost of anything. But I've also seen
Java programmers who had an deep understanding of the underlying virtual
machine and the cost of library routines who were able to use that
information and create fast, tight code. Same language, different
results. That tells me the problem isn't with the language. It's with
the skill, experience, and priorities of the programmers.
Modern development practice (as seen in the agile development
methodologies) pushes forward the same agenda that Forth programmers
have for years-- simple, efficient systems that are well tested and
implement only what is needed. And those aren't just toothless generic
programming platitudes as are often expressed here in comp.lang.forth.
They are part of the development process.
The stories in comp.lang.forth about projects that go bad say little to
nothing to me. I'm not terribly surprised that there are programmers
who aren't skilled in the world. I'm not terribly surprised when the
projects they work on fail. What I am surprised at is how in
comp.lang.forth, there is a huge skepticism about anything that reeks of
being a "silver bullet." But when people hold up Forth as being the
solution, then skepticism flies out the window. The way people conflate
Forth the language with "Forth-like" techniques which are language
independent is depressing.
| 
