> On 11 Mrz., 06:44, "werty" swissinfo.org> wrote:
>

>> Why does "Forth" mean a specific act
>> by Chuck Moore on september 17 1969 .
>> run only on a HP 1000 ?

>
> I would say that he called the thing "FORTH", so it is "FORTH". It
> evolved a little since then and now we call (most of) the languages
> that derrived from that origin "FORTH".
>

>> What good are you doing , limiting
>> the word Forth to this restriction ?

>
> As I told: I think the thing Chuck Moore developed on september 17
> 1969 (well, I'm not aware it was exactly this date ;) ) has to be
> respected. It's known by it's name FORTH.
>

>> How are you helping ?

>
> How can I help a sum of five letters? In alphabetical order: F H O R T
>

>> Forth means a place to store your stuff ,
>> and a symbolic way to use the
>> uC , mcu ,CPU's instruction set , so you can
>> create executable programs in minutes ,
>> using the tiny G.U.I. and without need for
>> a ASCII keyboard , nor the English langauge.

>
> This is what it means to you. I would follow
> "Forth means a place to store your stuff, you can create executable
> programs in minutes."
> I would not like to see mentioned "uC", "mcu", "CPU instruction set"
> in a definition. Also I would not like to see G.U.I. in definition.
> Even the usage of a GUI follows some language-using-like acts. Well,
> FORTH as in ANS is bound to English language. A standard at some way
> does some definitions at this point. But I perfectly could imagine to
> write a FORTH that uses only german words.
>

>> Programming is easy if you DONT study
>> what others have done .

>
> Yes and no. You've to study what others can do and try to figure out,
> how they did it. There are a few people on this planet that take a
> look on a programmed thing and instantly do have some idea about how
> it could be implemented. Those peoples time is wasted with 100%%
> understanding what the other did. They need to understand only, how
> the things work in principle. FORTH is a good language for such people
> - because they can express (in an own language) better than with
> things called "programming language" that where made by others.
>

>> Every book ever written , on programming
>> makes it more difficult .

>
> Definitively not. Something written about methods can be very
> inspiring. But you are right that there are only a few things out
> there that are really interesting.
>

>> P' has nothing to do with expertice at the
>> English language , nor mastering text .
>> nor college degrees ..

>
> Agreed.
>

>> Why dont you "nay sayers" go find
>> a non-creative place to post ?

>
> Just be careful. I'm a german language speaker - so "nay" is not in my
> repertoire.
> BTW: How about allowing others to access your system? Or your ideas in
> a little more "reality". Maybe it would cause some creative process.
>
> -Helmar
>