hi,

probably my statements are obvious to the most of you. but
after a long time of struggle with different languages it
seems that forth is most best suited for my needs.

I have a couple of years (20+) experience in software
development with Smalltalk, C, C++, Java and a little Lisp.
I never have been working with embedded stuff.
I'm working in the area of Bank, Insurance, Chemistry and others.

there always have been things which disturbing me.

*) I want to execute functions on compiletime, C preprocessor
is a shame, by far too less powerfull. so I wrote C
codegenerator (and even Smalltalk Code generator)
which also was not that perfect. Makefile has become more
complex then.

*) statically typing is more a problem than help. I think
it's more a feature to support optimizing code generation.
in forth you are free to use a number as integer, pointer
or what ever. no more casting - yep.

"Andreas Klimas" a

Celime wrote:

So much of the discussion in comp.lang.forth is about Forth's
advantages, but I rarely see anyone talking about Forth's disadvantages.
Could it be the "young programmers" you are talking to fully grok
Forth's advantages, but they may see disadvantages that you don't?

Could it also be that you're assuming that advantages in one domain
equates to advantages in another? Forth is a great language for
embedded systems. That doesn't mean that Forth is necessarily a great
language for web-based applications.

Another question: Many times in comp.lang.forth we see Forth compared
to "other languages." But in reality, there is rarely a comparison to
"other languages." Usually the comparison is with C, ignoring the much
larger universe of languages out there. And certainly, when comparing
Forth and C, there are a number of advantages. But when you start
looking outside C, some of the features that were traditionally seen as
unique in Forth are actually common.

On Oct 3, 10:35 am, John Passaniti JapanIsShinto.com> wrote:

Oh, it's Pissanti again.

FLAME-SUIT DON FLAMETHROWER ARM FLAMETHROWER AIM

Forth has no disadvantages that I see except for the fact that the
people in power have damned it to hell. It provides too much freedom
and they hate freedom.

No, it's just that the establishment has become so good at programming
the youth that youth can never see past the directives of the empire.
Double Plus Good. ++

On Oct 3, 7:35 pm, John Passaniti JapanIsShinto.com> wrote:

Many of the seen disadvantages are the advantages someone else sees.

I seriously think that Forth needs to go away from that "only good for
embedded applications" image. Also in embedded world memory and
processor power gets cheaper and cheaper and the need for a small i.e.
Forth decreases with every month.

Jason Damisch wrote:

Wow, that's incredibly clever. Last I heard that was when I was 10.

Wow, conspiracy theories. How compelling.

Wow, 1984 references. Works well with the conspiracy theories.

Good luck with that.

You sure you want to expose your lack of experience and apparent lack of
depth in programming languages in such an obvious and brazen way?

Celime wrote:

I don't think I agree. Programming in Mathematica has much the same
"feel" as programming in Forth. You produce comprehensible code by
composition of functions ("factors") rather than by procedural
narrative. The syntax differences are superficial, I think. The
semantics of the underlying engine are profoundly different, but that
represents the difference in the application domains of the languages.

helmwo@gmail.com wrote:

Sure. But that doesn't make it any less of a disadvantage to the person
evaluating it. My point is simply that you can't approach comparing
languages in terms of absolutes. When a Forther proudly declares that
with Forth you can have direct access to the hardware, that's a clear
advantage for embedded systems programming, but is little advantage to
someone doing (for example) web-applications. That's a singular example.

Forth gets away from the "only good for embedded applications" when
there is demonstrated evidence to the contrary. Don't tell me that
Forth can compete favorably in those other domains-- show me the
applications. What most people in comp.lang.forth seem to be doing is
to say, "Forth works well for me in my embedded systems work, so clearly
it must scale well and be competitive in other domains." Prove it.

Andreas Klimas writes Re: advantages of forth over other languages

[ .. agreed with ..]

I acknowledge this for my Linux environment (how I hate/dread gdb!),
but MS's Visual C++ environment under Windows is almost nice enough
to be useful. And some things I have to do to debug DLL's would be
nearly impossible with *only* Forth tools. OTOH, the Forth side of a
DLL interface problem is always lots and lots simpler than the C side.

I would say that the Visual studio toolset is at least as nice as
a good Forth compiler environment. However, once you have a difficult
compiler problem, in VC you may have absolutely no idea what is wrong...

On Oct 3, 9:42 pm, John Passaniti JapanIsShinto.com> wrote:

Well, I do have applications far from "embedded" market. You can see
them. Send me a private mail and I dont have any problems to show you.
For some reasons I can not publish it freely (even I want it!), since
it uses databases that are not in public now.