From: mikeh@starnine.com (Mike Haas)
Subject: Re: Free Forth
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 05:07:11 GMT
Organization: StarNine Technologies, Inc.

In article <1992Sep5.151245.18215@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> mikc@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mike Coughlin) writes:
>In article <BtCvML.Lzu@starnine.com> mikeh@starnine.com (Mike Haas) writes:
>>
>>The trend is more & more memory in the machine, so what do I care
>>if a Forth takes up 100k or 500k if I have Megs to work with?
>>
>
>   A small Forth fits in a human mind better than a big one. 

The only parts that need to "fit in your mind" are the parts you will
use in programs.  Identifying these words is the job of documentation,
and HELP programs, not VLIST.  The VLIST of a typical dictionary
has always been a hodge-podge of babble.

I want those hundreds of K to give me major functionality...
Good, comprehensive, fast floating point (that uses hardware if it exists),
Graphic & sound interfaces,  Ability to call the OS with names instead
of hex numbers, Smart optimizing compilers, Ability to create
standalone small programs that run in the native mode of the machine
(launched from shell, or icon double-clicked), performance profilers,
source-finders, Ability to interface with custom platform libraries--
code written in another language!

And to tell me how to use these things, I want good documentation.  THAT
is why I think the job of producing Forth implementation should be left
to vendors.  PD versions do not document or support their products as
well as commercial vendors (in the great majority of cases).

>You can
>do more with a system that you understand very well than you can with
>a big system that you don't understand.

Just because it's big, doesn't make it difficult.  Indeed, some of
that extra code should actually GIVE you something, like perhaps
an online HELP facility, or an integrated text editor, etc.


>Forth works very well in a
>small space since it uses a few good ideas put together in a clever
>way.

Works fine for imbedded systems, but falls flat on it's face when
you run on top of an Operating System (unless, of course, you live
in the past and don't WANT to take advantage of it).


>It is a much better way to do things than filling up all
>available memory with more code than a single person can comprehend.

Balderdash.  If there ever was a language that SHOULD provide clean
INTERACTIVE interfaces to complex Operating Systems and their facilitites,
it's Forth.  As long as it provides useful development tools, the more
the better.  (Don't you hate re-inventing the wheel?).

It's a shame there is no standard for Forth to interface with graphics
& sound, I/O requests, object files, etc.  If ans forth is truly
portable in practice, that would be a valuable stepping stone to
such capabilities.

Forth's strong points are it's interactivity, simple parser,
extensibility, simplicity.  It's too bad that it is so poor
at interfacing with existing development technology and at
"reaching out" into the worlds of the operating systems which
now form the basis for future computing.

We have to stop thinking along the lines of "oohh... the
dictionary is getting so large!".  (no porn jokes)

Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth