Re: primitives vs cleverness vs readability
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
comp.lang.forth only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

 Up
Re: primitives vs cleverness vs readability         

Group: comp.lang.forth · Group Profile
Author: Jerry Avins
Date: Aug 3, 2008 20:28

Elizabeth D Rather wrote:

...
> A story I've told here before is applicable (sorry if you've already
> heard it): FORTH, Inc. was asked to recode a baggage handling system
> for American Airlines. The original program was all assembler, and too
> expensive to maintain. We were required to reproduce the user interface
> and basic bag handling procedures, but could do whatever else seemed
> appropriate. Our program was written entirely in polyFORTH (ITC),
> running native on an LSI-11 (yeah, it was quite a few years ago). When
> it was sufficiently complete to run some timing tests, everyone was
> astonished: our system could handle 25%% more bags/minute than the
> previous one. polyFORTH was obviously not faster than pure assembler;
> the point was that our internal design was far more efficient than its
> predecessor.

Which code was running last Wednesday at JFK? What a mess!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080730/ts_nm/amr_jfk_dc

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
no comments
diggit! del.icio.us! reddit!