|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Anton ErtlAnton Ertl Date: Dec 12, 2007 02:17
Alex McDonald rivadpm.com> writes:[Fullquote shortened to the probably relevant part; please don't quote
everthing!]
>I noted with interest; "Klaus Schleisiek: Dying Forth". Would a
>summary of his argument be possible?
|
| Show full article (1.33Kb) |
|
| | 41 Comments |
|
|
Author: Alex McDonaldAlex McDonald Date: Dec 12, 2007 03:55
> Alex McDonald rivadpm.com> writes:>
>
> [Fullquote shortened to the probably relevant part; please don't quote
> everthing!]
I'm sorry, a habit born of other fora and a necessary defence when
replying to certain posters on clf.
>
>>I noted with interest; "Klaus Schleisiek: Dying Forth". Would a
>>summary of his argument be possible?
>
> I don't remember much (I did not find the topic that interesting), so
> here's just my impression...
|
| Show full article (1.71Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: vandysvandys Date: Dec 17, 2007 17:22
John Doty whispertel.losetheh.net> wrote:> Ian Osgood wrote:
>> P.S. to John Doty: I believe Factor is the "Forth for Python young
>> turks" that you are looking for. Factor is trying hard to broaden its
>> applicability and come with "batteries included".
> I don't think so. That's more a Forth descendant for computer
> scientists, not physical scientists. That's not a criticism: if Forth's
> ideas are to thrive in the 21st century, I think more than one
> descendant will be required. Hurray for Factor: keep the ideas alive and
> growing! But Factor is not the descendant I'm looking for. One language
> does not fit all applications, or even all parts of one application.
I just recently downloaded Factor and played with it some. I may not agree
with every design decision you've made, but you've obviously put some
excellent work into creating a post-Forth type of language. Kudos.
Andy Valencia
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: John DotyJohn Doty Date: Dec 17, 2007 17:30
> John Doty whispertel.losetheh.net> wrote:>> Ian Osgood wrote:
>>> P.S. to John Doty: I believe Factor is the "Forth for Python young
>>> turks" that you are looking for. Factor is trying hard to broaden its
>>> applicability and come with "batteries included".
>> I don't think so. That's more a Forth descendant for computer
>> scientists, not physical scientists. That's not a criticism: if Forth's
>> ideas are to thrive in the 21st century, I think more than one
>> descendant will be required. Hurray for Factor: keep the ideas alive and
>> growing! But Factor is not the descendant I'm looking for. One language
>> does not fit all applications, or even all parts of one application.
>
> I just recently downloaded Factor and played with it some. I may not...
|
| Show full article (1.23Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: znmebznmeb Date: Dec 24, 2007 20:50
On Dec 14, 5:19 pm, Ian Osgood quirkster.com> wrote:>> Alex McDonald rivadpm.com> writes:>
>
>> [Fullquote shortened to the probably relevant part; please don't quote
>> everthing!]
>
>>>I noted with interest; "Klaus Schleisiek: Dying Forth". Would a
>>>summary of his argument be possible? ...
|
| Show full article (3.28Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Mark W. HumphriesMark W. Humphries Date: Dec 24, 2007 20:56
On Dec 25, 12:50 pm, znmeb gmail.com> wrote:> 3. What am I doing to promote Forth? Not much, really. When someone
> asks me what language they should learn to give them a new perspective
> on programming, I usually say that there are really only two languages
> -- Forth and Lisp/Scheme. And most everyone has tried Lisp/Scheme. :)
I add Prolog and J/APL to that list.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: The Beez'The Beez' Date: Dec 24, 2007 21:20
> What are other folks doing to promote Forth?
Most of all, write Forth and improve on my compiler. Maybe that is an
idea for this newsgroup. Instead of bashing each others heads in all
the time for (sometimes) the most trivial of discussions, we could do
what other .lang groups do best: exchange ideas and code and help
newbies.
Has anyone ever though what an impression it makes when one gets here?
We're talking ABOUT a language instead of doing it. We're so 1337. We
claim that Forth is 'an amplifier', not for occasional programmers AND
we're proud to be 'reasonably polite nowadays' when it comes to help
newbies with "stupid" questions. When I started to make an easy Forth
with - god forbid - a MANUAL people were shaking their heads. 'If
you're not smart enough to figure out the compiler source code, Forth
is not for you'. Now that is a way to attract a crowd. Wondering why
Forth is dying?
|
| Show full article (1.87Kb) |
| 4 Comments |
|
|
Author: vandysvandys Date: Dec 24, 2007 21:35
> ... When someone
> asks me what language they should learn to give them a new perspective
> on programming, I usually say that there are really only two languages
> -- Forth and Lisp/Scheme. And most everyone has tried Lisp/Scheme. :)
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: znmebznmeb Date: Dec 24, 2007 23:16
On Dec 24, 8:56 pm, "Mark W. Humphries" intranetsys.com> wrote:> On Dec 25, 12:50 pm, znmeb gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 3. What am I doing to promote Forth? Not much, really. When someone
>> asks me what language they should learn to give them a new perspective
>> on programming, I usually say that there are really only two languages
>> -- Forth and Lisp/Scheme. And most everyone has tried Lisp/Scheme. :)
>
> I add Prolog and J/APL to that list.
Well ... the original APL was certainly unique, and was in fact a
genuine innovation in programming languages. But as far as I'm
concerned Prolog is a Lisp dialect. :)
I think J is also gone from the face of the Earth. There is something
called K which is not IIRC open source, and a dialect of APL called
APlus that is open source but not all that active.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: znmebznmeb Date: Dec 24, 2007 23:21
On Dec 24, 9:20 pm, "The Beez'" bigfoot.com> wrote:> We're probably the only crowd who have exiled their creator, since 'he
> obviously doesn't understand his own language'. Variations are
> blasphemy - unless you've moved so far away from ANS Forth that it
> becomes harmless. No, they're only a reason for another rant or
> useless discussion. LSE64, StrongForth, 4tH to name a few..
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. In what way have we
"exiled" Charles Moore?
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
